e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
October 31, 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
001-32465
VERIFONE HOLDINGS,
INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as
Specified in its Charter)
|
|
|
DELAWARE
|
|
04-3692546
|
(State or Other Jurisdiction
of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
2099 Gateway Place, Suite 600
San Jose, CA
(Address of Principal
Executive Offices)
|
|
95110
(Zip Code)
|
(408) 232-7800
(Registrants Telephone
Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
Common Stock, $.01 par value
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K,
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer þ
|
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
As of April 30, 2007, the aggregate market value of the
common stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates was
approximately $2.253 billion based on the closing sale
price as reported on the New York Stock Exchange.
There were 84,194,231 shares of the registrants
common stock issued and outstanding as of the close of business
on July 31, 2008.
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC.
2007
ANNUAL REPORT ON
FORM 10-K
INDEX
i
FORWARD
LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report and certain information incorporated by reference
herein contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995,
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and
Section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934. These statements
relate to future events or our future financial performance. In
some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by
terminology such as may, should,
expect, plan, intend,
anticipate, believe,
estimate, predict,
potential, or continue, the negative of
such terms, or comparable terminology.
Actual events or results may differ materially. In evaluating
these statements, you should specifically consider various
factors, including the risks outlined in
Item 1A-Risk
Factors in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
These factors may cause our actual results to differ materially
from any forward-looking statement.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the
forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee
future results, events, levels of activity, performance, or
achievements. Moreover, neither we nor any other person assumes
responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the
forward-looking statements.
These statements relate to future events or our future financial
performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties,
and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of
activity, performance, or achievements to be materially
different from any future results, levels of activity,
performance, or achievements expressed or implied by these
forward-looking statements. These risks and other factors
include those listed under
Item 1A-Risk
Factors in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and elsewhere in this report. We are under no duty to update any
of the forward-looking statements after the date of this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
to conform such statements to actual results or to changes in
expectations.
ii
PART I
We are a global leader in secure electronic payment solutions.
We provide expertise, solutions, and services that add value to
the point of sale with merchant-operated, consumer-facing, and
self-service payment systems for the financial, retail,
hospitality, petroleum, transportation, government, and
healthcare vertical markets. Since 1981, we have designed and
marketed system solutions that facilitate the long-term shift
toward electronic payment transactions and away from cash and
checks.
Our system solutions consist of point of sale electronic payment
devices that run our proprietary and third-party operating
systems, security and encryption software, and certified payment
software as well as third-party, value-added applications. Our
system solutions are able to process a wide range of payment
types. They include signature and PIN-based debit cards, credit
cards, contactless/radio frequency identification, or RFID,
cards and tokens, Near Field Communication, or NFC, enabled
mobile phones, smart cards, pre-paid gift and other stored-value
cards, electronic bill payment, check authorization and
conversion, signature capture, and electronic benefits transfer,
or EBT. Our proprietary architecture was the first to enable
multiple value-added applications, such as gift card and loyalty
card programs, healthcare insurance eligibility, and time and
attendance tracking, to reside on the same system without
requiring recertification when new applications are added to the
system. We are an industry leader in multi-application payment
system deployments and we believe we have the largest selection
of certified value-added applications.
We design our system solutions to meet the demanding
requirements of our direct and indirect customers. Our
electronic payment systems are available in several modular
configurations, offering our customers flexibility to support a
variety of connectivity options, including wireline and wireless
internet protocol, or IP, technologies. We also offer our
customers support for installed systems, consulting and project
management services for system deployment, and customization of
integrated software solutions.
Security has become a driving factor in our business as our
customers endeavor to meet ever escalating governmental
statutory requirements related to the prevention of identity
theft as well as operating regulation safeguards from the credit
and debit card associations, including Visa International, or
Visa, MasterCard Worldwide, or MasterCard, American Express,
Discover Financial Services, and JCB Co., Ltd., or JCB. In 2007,
these card associations established the Payment Card Industry
Council, or PCI Council, to oversee and unify industry standards
in the areas of credit card data security, referred to as the
PCI-PED standard which consists of PIN-entry device security, or
PED, and the PCI Data Security Standard, or PCI-DSS, standard.
We are a leader in providing systems that meet these standards
and have upgraded or launched next generation system solutions
that span our product portfolio ahead of deadlines.
Our customers are primarily financial institutions, payment
processors, petroleum companies, large retailers, government
organizations, and healthcare companies, as well as independent
sales organizations, or ISOs. The functionality of our system
solutions includes transaction security, connectivity,
compliance with certification standards and the flexibility to
execute a variety of payment and non-payment applications on a
single system solution.
Company
History
VeriFone, Inc., our principal operating subsidiary, was
incorporated in 1981. Shortly afterward, we introduced the first
check verification and credit authorization device ever utilized
by merchants in a commercial setting. In 1984, we introduced the
first mass market electronic payment system intended to replace
manual credit card authorization devices for small merchants.
VeriFone, Inc. became a publicly traded company in 1990 and was
acquired by Hewlett-Packard Company in 1997. Hewlett-Packard
operated VeriFone, Inc. as a division until July 2001, when it
sold VeriFone, Inc. to Gores Technology Group, LLC, a privately
held acquisition and investment management firm, in a
transaction led by our Chief Executive Officer, Douglas G.
Bergeron. In July 2002, Mr. Bergeron and certain investment
funds affiliated with GTCR Golder Rauner, LLC, or GTCR, a
private equity firm, led a recapitalization in which VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. was organized as a holding company for VeriFone,
1
Inc., and GTCR-affiliated funds became our majority
stockholders. We completed our initial public offering on
May 4, 2005.
On November 1, 2006, we acquired Lipman Electronic
Engineering Ltd. (Lipman). In connection with this
acquisition, we issued 13,462,474 shares of our common
stock and paid $347.4 million in cash in exchange for all
the outstanding ordinary shares of Lipman. All options to
purchase Lipman ordinary shares were exchanged for options to
purchase approximately 3.4 million shares of our common
stock. In addition, in accordance with the merger agreement,
Lipmans Board of Directors declared a special cash
dividend of $1.50 per Lipman ordinary share, or an aggregate
amount of $40.4 million. This special cash dividend was
paid on October 23, 2006 to Lipman shareholders of record
as of October 11, 2006. The aggregate purchase price for
this acquisition was $799.3 million. See
Note 3 Business Combinations of
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
information related to this acquisition.
Our
Industry
The electronic payment solutions industry encompasses systems,
software, and services that enable the acceptance and processing
of electronic payments for goods and services and provide other
value-added functionality at the point of sale. The electronic
payment system is a critical part of the payment processing
infrastructure. We believe that current industry trends,
including the global shift toward electronic payment
transactions and away from cash and checks, the rapid
penetration of electronic payments in emerging markets as those
economies modernize, the increasing proliferation of internet
protocol, or IP, connectivity and wireless communication, and an
increasing focus on security to combat fraud and identity theft,
will continue to drive demand for electronic payment systems.
The electronic payment system serves as the interface between
consumers and merchants at the point of sale and with the
payment processing infrastructure. It captures critical
electronic payment data, secures the data through sophisticated
encryption software and algorithms, and routes the data across a
range of payment networks for processing, authorization, and
settlement. Payment networks include credit card networks, such
as Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, that route credit
card and signature-based debit transactions, as well as
electronic funds transfer, or EFT, networks, such as STAR,
Interlink, and NYCE, that route PIN-based debit transactions. In
a typical electronic payment transaction, the electronic payment
system first captures and secures consumer payment data from one
of a variety of payment media, such as a credit or debit card,
smart card, or contactless/RFID card. Consumer payment data is
then routed from the electronic payment system to the
appropriate payment processor and financial institution for
authorization. Finally, the electronic payment system receives
the authorization to complete the transaction between the
merchant and consumer.
Industry
Trends
The major trend driving growth in the global payments industry
has been the move towards electronic payment transactions and
away from cash and checks. This trend has been accelerated by
the usage of credit and debit card based payments, especially
PIN-based debit. Another key driver is the growth in single
application credit card solutions, which enable merchants to
provide an efficient payment solution in non-traditional
settings such as the emergence of
pay-at-the-table
in restaurants, which is capitalizing on the development of
wireless communications infrastructure. The key geographic,
technological, and regulatory drivers for this trend towards
electronic payments are discussed below.
Rapid
Penetration of Electronic Payments in Emerging
Markets
Certain regions, such as Eastern Europe, Latin America, and
Asia, have lower rates of electronic payments and are
experiencing rapid growth. The adoption of electronic payments
in these regions is driven primarily by economic growth,
infrastructure development, support from governments seeking to
increase value-added tax, or VAT, sales tax collection, and the
expanding presence of IP and wireless communication networks.
2
IP
Connectivity
Broadband connectivity provides faster transmission of
transaction data at a lower cost than traditional dial up
telephone connections, enabling more advanced payment and other
value-added applications at the point of sale. Major
telecommunications carriers have expanded their communications
networks and lowered fees, which allows more merchants to
utilize IP based networks cost effectively. The faster
processing and lower costs associated with IP connectivity have
opened new markets for electronic payment systems, including
many that have been primarily cash-only industries such as quick
service restaurants, or QSRs. New wireless electronic payment
solutions are being developed to increase transaction processing
speed, throughput, and mobility at the point of sale, and offer
significant security benefits by enabling consumers to avoid
relinquishing their payment cards. A portable device can be
presented to consumers, for example, to
pay-at-the-table
in full-service restaurants or to pay in other environments,
such as outdoor arenas, pizza delivery, farmers markets,
and taxi cabs.
Growth
of Wireless Communications
The development and increased use of wireless communications
infrastructure are increasing demand for compact, easy-to-use,
and reliable wireless payment solutions. The flexibility, ease
of installation, and mobility of wireless makes this technology
an attractive and often more cost-effective alternative to
traditional landline-based telecommunications.
The wireless communications industry has grown substantially in
the United States and globally over the past twenty years.
Cellular and Wireless Fidelity or Wi-Fi, communications fully
support secure IP based payment transactions, which, with the
increased speed of wireless communications, and ever-expanding
coverage maps of standardized wireless data technologies such as
General Packet Radio Service, or GPRS, and Code
Division Multiple Access, or CDMA, makes wireless
telecommunications an attractive alternative to traditional
telecommunications.
Mobile technologies enable new applications for electronic
payment transactions, including
pay-at-the-table
and
pay-at-the-curb
in restaurants, as well as electronic card payments in
environments that once required cash payments or more expensive
off-line card acceptance. These include delivery services,
in-home services, taxi, and limousine credit and debit card
acceptance. Mobile technologies also facilitate establishment of
temporary payment stations such as kiosks and event ticketing
and vending.
Increasing
Focus on Security to Minimize Fraud and Identity
Theft
Industry security standards are constantly evolving, driving
recertification and replacement of electronic payment systems,
particularly in Europe and the United States. In order to offer
electronic payment systems that connect to payment networks,
electronic payment system providers must certify their products
and services with card associations, financial institutions, and
payment processors and comply with government and
telecommunications company regulations. This certification
process may take up to twelve months to complete.
Storage and handling of credit card data by retailers represents
a constant threat of fraud and identity theft, creating
tremendous risk of financial and reputation losses.
The protection of cardholder data currently requires retailers
to:
|
|
|
|
|
Install only approved PIN-Entry Devices and replace any
un-approved devices by 2010;
|
|
|
|
Upgrade or modify processing systems to ensure ALL applications
that capture, manage, transmit, or store card holder information
within the enterprise meet Payment Applications Best Practices;
|
|
|
|
Upgrade wired/wireless networking infrastructure to
high-security routers/switches/hubs;
|
|
|
|
Make wholesale changes to password and other system access
policies; and
|
|
|
|
Undertake costly quarterly or annual security audits by approved
third-party auditors.
|
The current industry-wide response to this threat is to
lock down all enterprise systems. This approach is
difficult and costly due to the complexity of most retail
Information Technology, or IT, environments, and is
3
unlikely to guarantee protection against data breaches.
Furthermore, any system change, no matter how small, may be
costly and time consuming to retailers as modification of any
portion of the point of sale, or POS, system usually requires
end-to-end re-certification.
Payment Card Industry Security Standards. The
major card associations have established and participate on the
policy-setting Executive Committee of the Payment Card Industry
Security Standards Council, or PCI SSC. The PCI SSC has
introduced PCI-DSS to address the growing demand for transaction
security. Visa, MasterCard, American Express, Discover Financial
Services, and JCB continue to cooperate on the development and
release of more stringent PCI-DSS guidelines and test methods
for the certification of electronic payment systems for secure
credit and debit transactions. Recently the PCI PED program that
Visa and MasterCard jointly managed has been brought under the
oversight of the PCI SSC. The PCI SSC is also in the process of
adopting the Visa Payment Application Best Practices, or PABP,
program and making it a mandate of the PC-DSS. VeriFone was
elected as a member of the PCI SSC Board of Advisors and is the
only payment systems representative on the Council.
Card Association Standards. In addition to the
above, an organization entitled EMVCo LLC was formed in 1999 by
EuroPay International, MasterCard International, and Visa
International to manage, maintain, and enhance a set of EMV
integrated circuit card, or smart card, specifications and a
corresponding compliance testing and certification approval
process. The EMV Specifications are designed to ensure
interoperability between smart cards and electronic payment
systems on a worldwide basis, while increasing functionality of
electronic payment systems and reduction of electronic
transaction fraud. Deadlines for EMV compliance vary by card
association and region, with liability shift in Europe ahead of
other regions. Merchants and financial institutions that are not
compliant with EMV standards may be subject to various sanctions.
Class A/B Certification. United States,
or U.S., payment processors have two levels of certification,
referred to as Class A and Class B. Class B
certification ensures that an electronic payment system adheres
to the payment processors basic functional and network
requirements. Class A certification adds another
stipulation that the payment processor will support the
electronic payment system on its internal help desk systems.
Obtaining these certifications, which are required by
U.S. payment processors, can be time intensive and costly.
Regional Security Standards. Electronic
payment systems must also comply with evolving country-specific
security regulations. Countries such as Australia, Canada, the
Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, Germany, Sweden, and
Switzerland have particularly stringent and specific security
requirements. Electronic payment systems also must comply with
the recommendations of quasi-regulatory authorities and
standards-setting committees, which address, among other things,
fraud prevention, processing protocols, and technologies
utilized. New standards are continually being adopted as a
result of worldwide fraud prevention initiatives, increasing the
need for system compatibility and new developments in
technology. Electronic payment system providers must manage
these complex requirements, which may require ongoing
enhancements to existing systems or replacement with newly
certified electronic payment systems.
Contactless
Payments and Mobile Phone Initiated Payments based on
NFC
Payments initiated via Contactless RFID technology continue to
grow in popularity with trials, pilots, or rollouts taking place
in all major geographies. Contactless payment credentials can be
in the form of credit cards, key fobs, or other devices which
use radio frequency communications between the payment
credential and the point of sale system. According to the
Smartcard Alliance, domestically there are approximately
18 million RFID-imbedded cards now in circulation and over
fifty-one thousand retail locations now able to accept
contactless payments. This contactless acceptance infrastructure
is not only capable of reading card, fob, or token-based RFID
payment media, but is also compatible with payments initiated
via mobile phones using NFC technology.
Unattended
Self-Service Kiosks and Outdoor Payment Systems
The growth in EMV transactions that require consumers to enter a
secret PIN code has had a trickle down effect on all aspects of
the payment acceptance infrastructure, including self-service
market segments. Unattended applications such as automated
ticketing machines, self-order kiosks, bill payment, product
vending, telephone calling card top up, and self checkout
applications that historically relied on a simple magnetic
stripe reader to process credit and debit payments now require
complex and secure payment systems to interact with the consumer
4
safely and securely. Due to the dramatic increase in
complexities involved in developing compliant, secure, and
certified payment solutions, most unattended and outdoor kiosk
vendors have turned to traditional payment system vendors such
as VeriFone to provide easy to integrate and pre-certified
payment modules to enable the future of electronic payments in
these environments.
Our
Growth Strategy
Our objective is to enhance our position as a leading provider
of technology that enables electronic payment transactions and
value-added services at the point of sale. The key elements of
our strategy are to:
Capitalize
on High Growth Opportunities in Emerging Markets
We seek to establish a leading position in emerging, high growth
electronic payment markets in Eastern Europe, Asia, and Latin
America. We acquired Lipman to leverage its leadership position
in emerging markets to grow further, particularly in China,
India, Brazil, and Turkey, where demand for electronic payment
systems is growing rapidly.
Expand
Leadership Position in North America
In North America, we are increasing sales to small and
medium-sized merchants by further strengthening our
relationships with ISOs. The Lipman acquisition has enabled us
to strengthen our ISO relationships as Lipman was the leading
provider of wireless payment systems to the ISO market. Another
key growth factor that we are seeking to capitalize on in North
America is the terminal upgrade cycle driven primarily by the
continuing migration from
dial-up to
IP systems, enhanced security requirements, and demand for
non-payment applications such as gift, loyalty, and money
transfer. We intend to continue to seek opportunities to
increase our leadership position in North America by
leveraging our brand, market position, scale, technology, and
distribution channels.
Address
Customers Intense Focus on Security to Meet Industry
Standards
We intend to pursue market share growth globally based upon our
leading portfolio of products that, in many cases meet enhanced
security schedules well ahead of industry deadlines and
competitive offerings. We expect to see increased market turn
over opportunities as our customers review their existing
installed base of terminals and look to reduce risk through
replacement of older non-approved devices, and in some cases
ahead of industry mandated deadlines.
We also see opportunities to assist large retailers with
protecting credit and debit card data throughout their
enterprise and expect to work with these retailers to help them
achieve compliance with PCI-DSS, thus lowering the overall risk
of data compromise.
Increase
Market Share in Western Europe
We intend to pursue increased market share in Western Europe by
capitalizing on industry trends, continuing to penetrate key
sales channels, and expanding our product offerings. In
addition, we also plan to leverage the strength received from
the Lipman acquisition as a leading position in Spain and Italy,
while at the same time working hard to increase our share in
markets such as France and Scandinavia, where neither we nor
Lipman had a strong presence.
Further
Penetrate Attractive Vertical Markets
We plan to continue to increase the functionality of our system
solutions to address the specific needs of various vertical
markets. We currently provide system solutions that are
customized for the needs of our financial services, petroleum
company,
multi-lane
retail, government, and healthcare customers. As an example, our
system solutions allow our petroleum company customers to manage
fuel dispensing and control and enable pay at the
pump functionality, cashiering, store management,
inventory management, and accounting for goods and services at
the point of sale. We recently announced the Secure PumpPAY
solution which is a cost effective retrofit and upgrade to the
insecure, uncertified pump payment systems currently deployed in
over 700,000 gas pumps
5
domestically. The major credit card associations have mandated
that starting January 1, 2009, all new self-service pumps
must have PCI-approved PIN-entry devices. Further, beginning
July 1, 2010, all card transactions at pumps must be
protected with advanced Triple DES encryption technology.
In the
multi-lane
retail market, we offer system solutions that allow our
customers to pursue full-motion video, a color display, digital
quality sound, and highly secure payment capabilities in a
single, easy-to-use system that integrates with leading
point-of-sale
in-lane and
back office networked systems. With our technology,
multi-lane
retailers also have a new way to broadcast multi-media
advertising and corporate messaging content directly to their
customers.
In the
pay-at-the-table
and
pay-at-the-car
markets, we have established key distribution partnerships with
large banks and processors with whom we have agreed to market
our ON THE SPOT wireless restaurant payment system to the top
250 restaurant companies domestically. We have also integrated
our solutions with the top three Restaurant Management System
Vendors, allowing our systems to work seamlessly within the
restaurant, and we have also launched our ON THE SPOT Managed
solution targeted at the ISO channel as an easy to install
turnkey solution for smaller restaurants.
Pursue
Selective, Strategic Acquisitions
We may augment our organic growth by acquiring complementary
businesses, product lines, or technologies. Our acquisition
strategy is intended to broaden our suite of electronic payment
solutions, expand our presence in selected geographies, broaden
our customer base, and increase our penetration of distribution
channels and vertical markets.
Our
System Solutions
Our system solutions are available in several distinctive
modular configurations, offering our customers flexibility to
support a variety of consumer payment and connectivity options,
including wireline and wireless IP technologies.
Countertop
Our countertop electronic payment systems accept magnetic, smart
card, and contactless/RFID cards and support credit, debit,
check, electronic benefits transfer, and a full range of
pre-paid products, including gift cards and loyalty programs,
among many others. Our countertop solutions are available under
the Vx solutions, NURIT, and Secura brands. These electronic
payment systems incorporate high performance 32-bit ARM
microprocessors and have product line extensions targeted at the
high-end countertop broadband and wireless solutions for
financial retail,
multi-lane
retail, hospitality, government, and health care market
segments. We design our products in a modular fashion to offer a
wide range of options to our customers, including the ability to
deploy new technologies at minimal cost as technology standards
change. Our electronic payment systems are easily integrated
with a full range of optional external devices, including secure
PIN pads, check imaging equipment, barcode readers,
contactless/RFID readers, and biometric devices. Our secure PIN
pads support credit and debit transactions, as well as a wide
range of applications that are either built into electronic
payment systems or connect to electronic cash registers, or
ECRs, and POS systems. In addition, we offer an array of
certified software applications and application libraries that
enable our countertop systems and secure PIN pads to interface
with major ECR and POS systems.
Mobile/Wireless
We offer a line of wireless system solutions that support
IP-based
CDMA, GPRS, and Wi-Fi technologies for secure, always
on connectivity. In addition, we have recently added a
Bluetooth communications solution to our portfolio of wireless
payment systems. We expect that market opportunities for
wireless solutions will continue to be found in developing
countries where wireless telecommunications networks are being
deployed at a much faster rate than wireline networks. We have
leveraged our wireless system to enter into new markets for
electronic payment solutions such as the emerging
pay-at-the-table
market solutions for full-service restaurants and systems
6
for transportation and delivery segments where merchants and
consumers are demanding secure payment systems to reduce fraud
and identity theft.
Consumer-activated
We offer a line of products specifically designed for
consumer-activated functionality at the point of sale. These
products include large, easy-to-read displays, user-friendly
interfaces, ECR interfaces, durable key pads, signature capture
functionality, and other features that are important to serving
customers in a
multi-lane
retail environment. For example, our signature capture devices
automatically store signatures and transaction data for fast
recall, and the signature image is time stamped for fraud
prevention. Our consumer-activated system solutions also enable
merchants to display advertising, promotional content, loyalty
program information, and electronic forms in order to market
products and services to consumers at the point of sale. We have
extended our product portfolio to support these same features
into the unattended market segments such as parking, ticketing,
vending machines, gas pumps, self-checkout, and QSR markets.
Petroleum
Our family of products for petroleum companies consists of
integrated electronic payment systems that combine card
processing, fuel dispensing, and ECR functions, as well as
secure payment systems for integration with leading petroleum
pump controllers and systems. These products are designed to
meet the needs of petroleum company operations, where rapid
consumer turnaround, easy pump control, and accurate record
keeping are imperative. These products allow our petroleum
company customers to manage fuel dispensing and control and
enable pay at the pump functionality, cashiering,
store management, inventory management, and accounting for goods
and services at the point of sale. They are compatible with a
wide range of fuel pumps, allowing retail petroleum outlets to
integrate our systems easily at most locations. We have recently
expanded this suite of products to add a range of high security
unattended devices and related software products targeted at
integration with the petroleum pumps in domestic and
international markets.
Server-based
Our server-based transaction products enable merchants to
integrate advanced payment functionality into PC-based
electronic systems seamlessly. These products handle all of the
business logic steps related to an electronic payment
transaction (credit, debit, gift, and loyalty), including
collection of payment-related information from the consumer and
merchant, and communication with payment processors for
authorization and settlement. Our products also enable the
functionality of peripherals that connect to PC-based electronic
payment systems, including consumer-activated products such as
secure PIN pads and signature capture devices. The PayWare
software product line we acquired from Trintech Group PLC in
November 2006 has augmented our server based, enterprise payment
software solutions. They include PayWare Merchant, a scalable,
high-performance payment solution and Card Management System, or
CMS, an enterprise solution used by both acquiring and issuing
entities.
Our
Services
Client
Services
We support our installed base by providing payment system
consulting, deployment,
on-site and
telephone-based installation and training,
24-hour help
desk support, repairs, replacement of impaired system solutions,
asset tracking, and reporting. We provide a single source of
comprehensive management services providing support primarily
for our own system solutions in most vertical markets. Our
services address many system configurations, including local
area networks, leased-line, and
dial-up
environments. We also offer customized service programs for
specific vertical markets in addition to standardized service
plans.
Customized
Application Development
We provide specific project management services for large
turn-key application implementations. Our project management
services include all phases of implementation, including
customized software development, procurement, vendor
coordination, site preparation, training, installation,
follow-on support, and legacy system
7
disposal. We also offer customer education programs as well as
consulting services regarding selection of product and payment
methodologies and strategies such as debit implementation. We
believe that our client services are distinguished by our
ability to perform mass customizations for large customers
quickly and efficiently.
Technology
We have developed the following core technologies that are
essential to the creation, delivery, and management of our
system solutions. We believe these technologies are central to
our leadership position in the electronic payment solutions
industry.
Platform
Architecture
Our secure, multi-tasking, multi-application platform
architecture consists of an ARM
System-on-Chip,
our Verix and NURIT operating systems, multi-application
support, and file authentication technology. The combination of
these technologies provides an innovative memory protection and
separation scheme to ensure a robust and secure operating
environment, enabling the download and execution of multiple
applications on an electronic payment system without the need
for recertification.
Our operating environment and modular design provide a
consistent and intuitive user interface for third-party
applications as well as our own. We believe our platform design
enables our customers to deliver and manage multi-application
payment systems in a timely, secure, and cost-effective manner.
We continue to enhance and extend the capabilities of our
platform to meet the growing demands of our customers for
multi-application payment systems.
Our newer consumer-activated and unattended payment system
solutions also incorporate a commercial Linux operating system
that we have customized to include security, application
resources, and data communication capabilities required in these
payment systems. The Linux operating system was chosen for
functionality, adaptability, and robustness as well as the
readily available development tools for graphical user interface
and multi-media content applications.
Libraries
and Development Tools
We believe that by delivering a broad portfolio of application
libraries and development tools to our large community of
internal and third-party application developers, we are able to
significantly reduce the time to obtain certification for our
system solutions. By packaging complex programming modules such
as EMV, smart card interfaces, wireless communications, IP, and
secure socket layer, or SSL, into standard libraries with
defined programming interfaces, we facilitate the timely and
consistent implementation of our multi-application system
solutions. Further, we maintain a high level of application
compatibility across platforms, facilitating the migration of
applications to future solutions.
We also provide developer tool kits that contain industry
standard visual development environments (C/C++) along with
platform-specific compilers and debuggers. We provide numerous
support vehicles for our application development communities,
including Developer Training, a dedicated developers
support team, and VeriFone DevNet, an online developers
portal that provides registered developers access to libraries,
tools, programming guides, and support. Our libraries, tool
kits, training, and support systems facilitate the rapid growth
in deployment of third-party, value-added applications for our
system solutions.
We believe that this growing portfolio of value-added
applications increases the attractiveness of our solutions to
global financial institutions and payment processors. In the
highly competitive transaction processing market, these
institutions are looking for ways to differentiate their
solutions by adding additional services beyond credit and debit
transaction processing. These value-added applications provide
this differentiation and also provide a way to increase merchant
retention and revenue for these channels.
Application
Framework
Our SoftPay application framework contains a comprehensive set
of pre-certified software modules enabling rapid configuration
and delivery of merchant-ready applications for payment
processors and financial institutions. We have configured
SoftPay for use in a broad range of vertical markets including
retail, restaurants, lodging, and
8
rental services. SoftPay supports our comprehensive range of
wireline and wireless IP communications options, including
Ethernet, CDMA, GPRS, and Wi-Fi.
Remote
Management System
Effective remote management is essential to cost effective
deployment and maintenance of electronic payment systems. Our
VeriCentre and NURIT Control Center systems provide broad remote
management functionality for our system solutions, including
software downloads, application management, remote diagnostics,
and information reporting. In addition, we have developed a
solution for managing the multi-media content, signature
capture/storage/retrieval, and device management of our
multi-media capable, consumer activated Mx product line. Our
management system licensees are responsible for the
implementation, maintenance, and operation of the system. In
certain markets and with certain customers, we maintain and
manage the system to provide remote management services directly
to customers. In addition, message management functionality
allows financial institutions and payment processors to send
customized text and graphics messages to any or all of their
Verix NURIT, Secura, or Mx terminal based merchants, and receive
pre-formatted responses.
Customers
Our customers include financial institutions, payment
processors, petroleum companies, large retailers, government
organizations, and healthcare companies, as well as ISOs, which
re-sell our system solutions to small merchants. In North
America, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007,
approximately 45% of our sales were via ISOs, distributors,
resellers, and system integrators, approximately 45% were direct
sales to petroleum companies, retailers, and
government-sponsored payment processors, and the remainder were
to non-government-sponsored payment processors and financial
institutions. Internationally, for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, approximately 30% of our sales were via
distributors, resellers, and system integrators and the
remaining 70% were direct sales to financial institutions,
payment processors, and major retailers.
The percentage of net revenues from our ten largest customers,
including First Data Corporation, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Percentage of net revenues from our ten largest customers
|
|
|
30.8
|
%
|
|
|
36.1
|
%
|
|
|
33.1
|
%
|
Percentage of net revenues from First Data Corp. and its
affiliates
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
13.0
|
%
|
|
|
12.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 10% of net revenues |
No customer accounted for more than 10% of our net revenues for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 and no customer,
other than First Data Corporation and its affiliates, accounted
for more than 10% of our net revenues for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2006 and 2005. Sales to First Data Corporation
and its affiliates include its TASQ Technology division, which
aggregates orders it receives from payment processors and ISOs.
Sales and
Marketing
Our North American sales teams are focused specifically on
financial institutions, payment processors, third-party
distributors, and value-added resellers, and on specific
vertical markets, such as petroleum,
multi-lane
retail, restaurants, bank branches, self-service kiosks,
government, and healthcare. Our International sales teams are
based in offices located in 19 countries with regional coverage
responsibilities in Europe, the Middle East and Africa, or EMEA,
Asia/Pacific, and Latin America. Typically, each sales team
includes a general manager or managing director, account
representatives, business development personnel, sales
engineers, and customer service representatives with specific
vertical market expertise. The sales teams are supported by
client services, manufacturing, and product development teams to
deliver products and services that meet the needs of our diverse
customer base.
Our marketing group is responsible for product management,
account management, program marketing, and corporate
communications. Our product management group analyzes and
identifies product and technology trends in the marketplace and
works closely with our research and development group to develop
new products and enhancements. Our program marketing function
promotes adoption of our branded solutions through initiatives
9
such as our Value-Added Partner, or VAP, Program. Our corporate
communications function coordinates key market messaging across
regions, including public relations and go-to-market product
campaigns.
As of October 31, 2007, we had 367 sales and marketing
employees, representing approximately 17% of our total workforce.
Our VAP Program provides a technical, operational, and marketing
environment for third-party developers to leverage our
distribution channels to sell value-added applications and
services. As of October 31, 2007, over 37 third-party
developers, or partners, in our VAP Program have provided
solutions for pre-paid cards, gift cards, and loyalty cards and
age verification services, among others. Through the program,
merchants obtain seamless access to value-added applications,
allowing them to differentiate their offerings without a costly
product development cycle.
Global
Outsourcing and Manufacturing Operations
Prior to our Lipman acquisition, we outsourced 100% of our
product manufacturing to providers in the Electronic
Manufacturing Services, or EMS, industry. This work was
outsourced to Jabil Circuit, Inc., Sanmina-SCI Corporation, and
Inventec Appliances Corporation. We have enabled direct shipment
capability for several product lines from our EMS providers to
our customers in various countries around the world. We have
enhanced our previous supply chain model by creating a hybrid
global manufacturing function where we will be able to enjoy the
best elements of our outsourced model combined with our Israeli
in-house manufacturing facilities. We believe that this new
manufacturing model will provide us with significant advantages
in terms of cost, new product introductions, flexibility to meet
market demand, and quality.
Competition
Our principal competitors in the market for electronic payment
systems and services are Ingenico S.A. and Hypercom Corporation,
the two other large providers of payment systems as well as
First Data Corporation, Gemalto N.V., Gilbarco, Inc., a
subsidiary of Danaher Corporation, International Business
Machines Corporation, MICROS Systems, Inc., NCR Corporation,
Radiant Systems, Inc., and Symbol Technologies, Inc., which is
owned by Motorola, Inc. We compete primarily on the basis of the
following factors: trusted brand, end-to-end system solutions,
product certifications, value-added applications and advanced
product features, advanced communications modularity,
reliability, and low total cost of ownership.
We expect competition in our industry will be largely driven by
the requirements to respond to increasingly complex technology,
industry certifications, and security standards. We also see
continued emphasis on consolidation among suppliers as evidenced
by the recent Ingenico S.A./SAGEM Monetal merger and the
acquisition by Hypercom of Thales e-Transactions, as the scale
advantages related to research and development investment,
volume purchasing power, and sales/technical support
infrastructure continues to put pressure on smaller companies in
our industry. In addition, First Data Corporation, a leading
provider of payment processing services, has developed and
continues to develop a series of proprietary electronic payment
systems for the U.S. market.
Research
and Development
We work with our customers to develop system solutions that
address existing and anticipated end-user needs. Our development
activities are distributed globally and managed primarily from
the U.S. We utilize regional application development
capabilities in locations where labor costs are lower than in
the United States and where regional expertise can be leveraged
for our target markets in Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Our
regional development centers provide customization and
adaptation to meet the needs of customers in local markets. Our
modular designs enable us to customize existing systems in order
to shorten development cycles and time to market.
Our research and development goals include:
|
|
|
|
|
developing new solutions, technologies, and applications;
|
|
|
|
developing enhancements to existing technologies and
applications; and
|
|
|
|
ensuring compatibility and interoperability between our
solutions and those of third parties.
|
10
Our research and development expenses were $65.4 million,
$47.4 million, and $41.8 million for the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
Research and development expenses as a percent of net revenues
were 7.2%, 8.1%, and 8.6% for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. As of
October 31, 2007, we had 774 research and development
employees representing approximately 35% of our total workforce.
Industry
Standards and Government Regulations
In order to offer products that connect to payment networks,
electronic payment system providers must certify their products
and services with card associations, financial institutions, and
payment processors, as well as comply with government and
telecommunications company regulations.
We have gained an in-depth knowledge of certification
requirements and processes by working closely with card
associations, payment processors, security organizations, and
international regulatory organizations to certify our new
products. We accelerate this certification process by leveraging
our applications, user interface, and core technologies.
We retain a group of engineers who specialize in security design
methodologies. This group is responsible for designing and
integrating security measures in our system solutions and
conducts early design reviews with independent security lab
consultants to ensure compliance of our electronic payment
system designs with worldwide security standards.
Regulatory certifications are addressed by our compliance
engineering department, which is staffed by electromagnetic
compatibility, or EMC, safety, telecommunications, and wireless
carrier certification experts.
We actively participate in electronic payment industry working
groups that help develop market standards. Our personnel are
members of several working groups of the American National
Standards Institute, or ANSI, a private, non-profit organization
that administrates and coordinates voluntary standardization in
the U.S. and the Industry Standards Organization which
contains working groups responsible for international security
standards. They have leadership roles on subcommittees that
develop standards in such areas as financial transactions, data
security, smart cards, and the petroleum industry.
We also are subject to other legal and regulatory requirements,
including the European Unions, or EU, Restriction on
Hazardous Substances, or RoHS, Directive and the European Union
Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, or WEEE,
which are designed to restrict the use of certain hazardous
substances in finished goods and to require active steps to
promote recycling of components to limit the total quantity of
waste going to final disposal.
Although the European Commission has adopted both directives,
each member state is responsible for their enforcement. Each EU
member state has an independent responsibility to enact national
law to give effect to the WEEE Directive within its own borders,
resulting in some variations in the implementation of WEEE among
the different EU countries. In contrast, the RoHS directive has
been universally implemented in all EU countries in a standard
manner. In addition, similar legislations could be enacted in
other jurisdictions, including the United States.
In March 2007, VeriFone achieved compliance with the
Administrative Measures on the Control of Pollution Caused
by Electronic Information Products, commonly referred to
as China RoHS regulations, as required by Chinas Ministry
of Information Industry. Similar to the EU RoHS Directive, the
China regulations restrict the importation into and production
within China of electrical equipment containing certain
hazardous materials in electronic equipment.
We believe we have taken all necessary steps to ensure all newly
finished goods shipping into EU, China, and U.S. markets
were fully compliant with regional or country specific
environmental legislation. We are also working diligently with
local business representatives
and/or
customers on the various local WEEE compliance strategies,
including WEEE registration, collection, reporting and recycling
schemes.
11
We are also subject to the following standards and requirements:
Security
Standards
Industry and government security standards ensure the integrity
of the electronic payment process and protect the privacy of
consumers using electronic payment systems. New standards are
continually being adopted or proposed as a result of worldwide
fraud prevention initiatives, increasing the need for new
security solutions and technologies. In order for us to remain
compliant with the growing variety of international
requirements, we have developed a security architecture that
incorporates physical, electronic, operating system, encryption,
and application-level security measures. This architecture has
proven successful even in countries that have particularly
stringent and specific security requirements, such as Australia,
Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore,
Sweden, and Switzerland.
Card
Association Standards
Payment Card Industry Security Standards. In
September 2006, PCI Security Standards Council was formed by
American Express, Discover Financial Services, JCB, MasterCard,
and Visa. The PCI Security Standards Council is responsible for
developing and disseminating security specifications, validation
testing methods and security assessor training. The five
founding companies participate on the policy setting Executive
Committee of the Payment Card Industry Security Standards
Council.
In September 2006, the Council published an updated version of
the PCI Data Security Standard, or PCI-DSS, that represents a
common set of industry tools and measurements to help ensure the
safe handling of sensitive electronic transaction information.
The card associations continue to maintain their own security
programs but they recognize the PCI-DSS as the industry
standard. With significant risk to their brand name and
penalties for non-compliance or a security breach, merchants
have budgeted and are spending large amounts of money to achieve
PCI-DSS compliance. The PCI-SSC is also in the process of
adopting the PABP program and making it a mandate of the
PCI-DSS. This new program will be called the Payment Application
Data Security Standard, or PA-DSS, and it will force the
retirement or re-architecture of insecure point of sale systems.
Visa has issued a mandate that all new merchants boarded by
October 2008 must use a PABP validated application. To make
PCI-DSS compliance easier merchants will be forced to look for
PABP validated applications.
In September 2007, the PCI Security Standards Council announced
that the PCI PIN Entry Device, or PED, standard will be rolled
under the PCI Security Standards Council. This PCI PED standard
was previously maintained and updated by Visa, MasterCard, and
JCB. The PCI PED specification and testing requirements will
become a standard specification for the five card associations.
All previous mandates and deadlines regarding PCI PED compliance
will remain in effect under the PCI Security Standards Council.
Further alignment with regional and national debit networks and
certification bodies may occur, which would enable electronic
payment system providers to certify payment technology more
quickly and cost effectively. In practice, the PCI PED approval
process represents a significant increase in level of security
and technical complexity for PIN Entry Devices.
EMV Standards. EuroPay, MasterCard, and Visa,
or EMV, have introduced new standards to address the growing
need for transaction security and interoperability. One
important example is their establishment of EMVCo LLC, a smart
card standards organization that has prescribed specifications
for electronic payment systems (MasterCard, Visa, and JCB) to
receive certifications for smart card devices and applications.
The EMV standard is designed to ensure global smart card
interoperability across all electronic payment systems. To
ensure adherence to this standard, specific certifications are
required for all electronic payment systems and their
application software. We maintain EMV certifications across our
applicable product lines.
Contactless System Standards. The major card
associations have each established a brand around contactless
payment. The brands and specifications are
PayPass®
for MasterCard, Visa
payWave®
and Visa
Wave®
for Visa,
ExpressPay®
for American Express, and
ZIP®
for Discover Financial services. Along with these brands each of
the card associations has developed its own specifications
governing its brands user experience, data management, the
card-to-reader protocols and in at least one case the protocol
between the contactless reader and the host device. Each brand
of contactless payment has a complete set of specifications,
certification requirements and a very
12
controlled testing and approval process. In order to access the
specification and approval process, payment system manufacturers
must become licensees of the relevant card associations
specification. Although all of the specifications are based on
ISO-IEC 14443, a standard developed by the International
Organization for Standardization, the application approval
processes are not compatible with one another. MasterCard has
recently assigned its
PayPass®
contactless implementation specifications to EMVCo LLC, which
may be a first step towards the creation of a common
specification and certification standard for contactless payment
systems. VeriFone actively participates in several
standards bodies pursuing common standards for contactless
payments, including INCITS B10, The Smart Card Alliance and the
NFC Forum.
MasterCard PTS and TQM Standard. The
MasterCard POS Terminal Security (PTS) Program addresses
stability and security of IP communications between
IP-enabled
POS terminals and the acquirer host system using
authentication/encryption protocols approved by MasterCard
ensuring transaction data integrity. The purpose of this program
is threefold:
|
|
|
|
|
provide POS vendors with security guidelines to counter the
threats presented by the use of Internet/IP technologies within
the POS terminal infrastructure;
|
|
|
|
specifically address network vulnerabilities within the
increasingly popular IP networks; and
|
|
|
|
identify potential vulnerabilities of an end-to-end solution
that may occur as a result of failing to provide
confidentiality, integrity, availability, authentication,
non-repudiation, and replay attack prevention on the data being
transmitted over the Internet.
|
We have successfully achieved Vx product-line and NURIT
product-line compliance with the new MasterCard PTS security
specification regarding security of
IP-based
systems. The MasterCard PTS program approval applies to several
IP-enabled
products including the Vx 510, Vx 570, Vx 610, and Vx 670, as
well as the NURIT 8000, NURIT 8210, and NURIT 8400 payment
systems. We are the first and only terminal vendor to achieve
such a distinction across an entire product line.
The MasterCard Terminal Quality Management (TQM) program was
created in 2003 to help ensure the quality and reliability
of EMV compliant terminals worldwide. MasterCards
TQM program validates the entire lifecycle of the product, from
design to manufacturing and deployment. This is a hardware
quality management program, on top of the EMV Level 1
certification. It mainly involves the review and audit of the
vendors process in the different phases of implementation,
manufacturing, and distribution. At the end of the process, the
product is given a quality label. MasterCard has mandated the
quality label to all their member banks and has made it a
pre-requisite for their Terminal Integration Process (TIP) since
December 2003. We maintain TQM approval across all EMV
Level 1 approved products deployed with EMV applications.
Payment
Processor/Financial Institution Requirements
U.S. payment processors have two types of certification
levels, Class A and Class B. Class B
certification ensures that an electronic payment system adheres
to the payment processors basic functional and network
requirements. Class A certification adds another
stipulation that the processor actively support the electronic
payment system on its internal help desk systems. Attainment of
Class A certification, which may take up to twelve months,
requires working with each payment processor to pass extensive
functional and end-user testing and to establish the help desk
related infrastructure necessary to provide Class A
support. Attaining Class A certifications increases the
number of payment processors that may actively sell and deploy a
particular electronic payment system. We have significant
experience in attaining these critical payment processor
certifications and have a large portfolio of Class A
certifications with major U.S. processors. In addition,
several international financial institutions and payment
processors have certification requirements that electronic
payment systems must comply with in order to process
transactions on their specific networks. We have significant
direct experience and, through our international distributors,
indirect experience in attaining these required certifications
across the broad range of system solutions that we offer to our
international customers.
13
Telecommunications
Regulatory Authority and Carrier Requirements
Our products must comply with government regulations, including
those imposed by the Federal Communications Commission and
similar telecommunications authorities worldwide regarding
emissions, radiation, safety, and connections with telephone
lines and radio networks. Our products must also comply with
recommendations of quasi-regulatory authorities and of
standards-setting committees. Our electronic payment systems
have been certified as compliant with a large number of national
requirements, including those of the Federal Communications
Commission and Underwriters Laboratory in the U.S. and
similar local requirements in other countries.
In addition to national requirements for telecommunications
systems, wireless network service providers mandate certain
standards by which all connected devices and systems must comply
with in order to operate on these networks. Many wireless
network carriers have their own certification process for
devices to be activated and used on their networks. Our wireless
electronic payment systems have been certified by leading
wireless carrier networks around the world.
Proprietary
Rights
We rely primarily on copyrights, trademarks, patent filings, and
trade secret laws to establish and maintain our proprietary
rights in our technology and products. VeriFone maintains a
patent incentive program and patent committee, which encourages
and rewards employees to present inventions for patent
application and filings.
We currently hold 23 patents and have 38 patent applications
filed with various patent offices in several countries
throughout the world, including the United Status, Canada,
United Kingdom, European Union, China, Israel, India, Australia,
Japan, and South Africa.
We currently hold trademark registration in approximately 28
countries for VERIFONE and in approximately 40 countries for
VERIFONE including our ribbon logo. We currently hold trademark
registration in the United States and a variety of other
countries for product names and other marks.
We have not generally registered copyrights in our software and
other written works. Instead, we have relied upon common law
copyright, customer license agreements, and other forms of
protection. We use non-disclosure agreements and license
agreements to protect software and other written materials as
copyrighted
and/or trade
secrets.
In the U.S. and other countries, prior to 2001, our
predecessor held patents relating to a variety of POS and
related inventions, which expire in accordance with the
applicable law in the country where filed. In 2001, as part of
the divestiture of VeriFone, Inc. from Hewlett-Packard, or HP,
HP and VeriFone, Inc. entered into a technology agreement
whereby HP retained ownership of most of the patents owned or
applied for by VeriFone prior to the date of divestiture. The
technology agreement grants VeriFone a perpetual, non-exclusive
license to use any of the patented technology retained by HP at
no charge. In addition, we hold a non-exclusive license to
patents held by NCR Corporation related to signature capture in
electronic payment systems. This license expires in 2011, along
with the underlying patents.
Segment
and Geographical Information
For an analysis of financial information about geographic areas
as well as our segments, see Note 13
Segment and Geographic Information of Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included herein.
Employees
As of October 31, 2007, we employed 2,224 persons
worldwide. None of our employees are represented by a labor
union agreement or collective bargaining agreement. We have not
experienced any work stoppages and we believe that our employee
relations are good.
Available
Information
Our Internet address is
http://www.verifone.com.
We make available free of charge on our investor relations
website under SEC Filings our Annual Reports on
Form 10-K,
Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q,
Current Reports
14
on
Form 8-K,
registration statements and amendments to those reports and
registration statements as soon as reasonably practicable after
we electronically file or furnish such materials to the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. The SEC
maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and
information statements and other information regarding our
filings at
http://www.sec.gov.
A copy of any materials we file with the SEC also may be read
and copied at the SECs Public Reference Room at
100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20549.
Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room can be
obtained by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The risks set forth below may adversely affect our business,
financial condition, and operating results. In addition to the
risks set forth below and the factors affecting specific
business operations identified with the description of these
operations elsewhere in this report, there may also be risks of
which we are currently aware, or that we currently regard as
immaterial based on the information available to us that later
prove to be material.
Risks
Related to Our Business
Our
internal processes and controls and our disclosure controls have
been inadequate; if the processes and controls we have
implemented and continue to implement are inadequate, we may not
be able to comply with our financial statement certification
requirements under applicable SEC rules, or prevent future
errors in our financial reporting.
As described under Item 9A Controls and
Procedures in this Annual Report, we have identified
material weaknesses in our internal control over financial
reporting and have determined that our disclosure controls and
procedures were not effective. These weaknesses contributed to
our need to restate previously reported interim financial
information for each of the first three quarters of our fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007, and to the delays in the
filing of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We also were unable to file our quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
for our fiscal quarters ended January 31, 2008 and
April 30, 2008 on a timely basis. We have implemented and
intend to continue to implement a number of additional and
enhanced processes and controls to improve our internal control
over financial reporting. However, if we are unsuccessful in
adequately implementing these processes and controls, we may be
unable to comply with Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15
and 15d-15,
which specify the processes and controls that public companies
are required to have in place, and we may be unable to provide
the executive certificates required by Exchange Act
Rules 13a-14
and 15d-15,
in our quarterly and annual reports. Even if we implement such
controls, there can be no assurance that these controls will be
sufficient to detect or prevent future errors in financial
reporting. We have devoted additional resources to our financial
control and reporting requirements, including hiring additional
qualified employees in these areas. We expect to hire additional
employees and may also engage additional consultants in these
areas. Competition for qualified financial control and
accounting professionals in the geographic areas in which we
operate is keen and there can be no assurance that we will be
able to hire and retain these individuals.
We
have been named as a party to several class action and
derivative action lawsuits arising from the restatements, and we
may be named in additional litigation, all of which are likely
to require significant management time and attention and
expenses and may result in an unfavorable outcome which could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, and results of operations.
In connection with the restatements of our historical interim
financial statements, a number of securities class action
complaints were filed against us and certain of our officers,
and a number of purported derivative actions have also been
filed against certain of our current and former directors and
officers. See Item 3 Legal
Proceedings of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
The amount of time and resources required to resolve these
lawsuits is unpredictable, and defending ourselves is likely to
divert managements attention from the day-to-day
operations of our business, which could adversely affect our
business, financial condition, and results of operations. In
addition, an unfavorable outcome in such litigation is likely to
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, and results of operations.
Our insurance may not be sufficient to cover our costs in these
actions. In addition, we may be obligated to indemnify (and
advance legal expenses to) officers, employees and directors in
connection with these actions. We
15
currently hold insurance policies for the benefit of our
directors and officers, although our insurance coverage may not
be sufficient in some or all of these matters. Furthermore, our
insurance carriers may seek to deny coverage in some or all of
these matters, in which case we may have to fund the
indemnification amounts owed to such directors and officers
ourselves.
We are subject to the risk of additional litigation and
regulatory proceedings or actions in connection with the
restatements. We have responded to inquiries and provided
information and documents related to the restatement to the SEC,
the U.S. Department of Justice, the New York Stock
Exchange, and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The SEC also
has expressed an interest in interviewing several current and
former VeriFone officers and employees, and we are continuing to
cooperate with the SEC in responding to the SECs requests
for information. Additional regulatory inquiries may also be
commenced by other U.S. federal, state or foreign
regulatory agencies. In addition, we may in the future be
subject to additional litigation or other proceedings or actions
arising in relation to the restatement of our historical interim
financial statements. Litigation and any potential regulatory
proceeding or action may be time consuming, expensive and
distracting from the conduct of our business. The adverse
resolution of any specific lawsuit or any potential regulatory
proceeding or action could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our restatement and related litigation, as well as related
amendments to our credit instruments could result in substantial
additional costs and expenses and adversely affect our cash
flows, and may adversely affect our business, financial
condition, and results of operations. We have incurred
substantial expenses for legal, accounting, tax and other
professional services in connection with the Audit Committee
investigation, our internal review of our historical financial
statements, the preparation of the restated financial
statements, inquiries from government agencies, the related
litigation, and the amendments to our credit agreement as a
result of our failure to timely file our Exchange Act reports
with the SEC. We estimate that we have incurred approximately
$28.4 million of expenses related to these activities
through July 31, 2008, including $1.4 million of
professional fees to modify our credit instruments. We expect to
continue to incur significant expenses in connection with these
matters. See Secured Credit Facility under
Item 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources for
additional information related to the amendments to our credit
agreement. For more information on the risks related to the
amendments to our credit agreement, see the risk factor entitled
Our secured credit facility contains restrictive and
financial covenants and, if we are unable to comply with these
covenants, we will be in default under Risks Related
to Our Capital Structure.
Many members of our senior management team and our Board of
Directors have been and will be required to devote a significant
amount of time on matters relating to the restatement, our
outstanding periodic reports, remedial efforts and related
litigation. In addition, certain of these individuals are named
defendants in the litigation related to the restatement.
Defending these actions may require significant time and
attention from them. If our senior management is unable to
devote sufficient time in the future developing and pursuing our
strategic business initiatives and running ongoing business
operations, there may be a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and results of operations.
We
have experienced rapid growth, and if we cannot adequately
manage our growth, our results of operations will
suffer.
We have experienced rapid growth in our operations, both
internally and from acquisitions. Future rapid growth may place
a significant strain on managerial, operational, and financial
resources. We cannot be sure that we have made adequate
allowances for the costs and risks associated with our
expansion, or that our systems, procedures, and managerial
controls will be adequate to support further expansion in our
operations. Any delay in implementing, or transitioning to, new
or enhanced systems, procedures, or controls may adversely
affect our ability to manage our product inventory and record
and report financial and management information on a timely and
accurate basis. We expect that growth will require us to hire
additional finance and control, engineering, technical support,
sales, administrative, and operational personnel. Competition
for qualified personnel can be intense in the areas where we
operate and we have faced challenges in hiring qualified
employees in these areas. The process of locating, training and
successfully integrating qualified personnel into our operations
can be lengthy and expensive. If we are unable to successfully
manage expansion, our results of operations may be adversely
affected.
16
A
significant percentage of our business is executed towards the
end of our fiscal quarters. This could negatively impact our
business and results of operations.
Revenues recognized in our fiscal quarters tend to be back-end
loaded. This means that sales orders are received, product
shipped, and revenue recognized increasingly towards the end of
each fiscal quarter. This back-end loading, particularly if it
becomes more pronounced, could adversely affect our business and
results of operations due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
the manufacturing processes at our internal manufacturing
facility could become concentrated in a shorter time period.
This concentration of manufacturing could increase labor and
other manufacturing costs and negatively impact gross margins.
The risk of inventory write offs could also increase if we were
to hold higher inventory levels to counteract this;
|
|
|
|
the higher concentration of orders may make it difficult to
accurately forecast component requirements and, as a result, we
could experience a shortage of the components needed for
production, possibly delaying shipments and causing lost orders;
|
|
|
|
if we are unable to fill orders at the end of a quarter,
shipments may be delayed. This could cause us to fail to meet
our revenue and operating profit expectations for a particular
quarter and could increase the fluctuation of quarterly results
if shipments are delayed from one fiscal quarter to the next or
orders are cancelled by customers; and
|
|
|
|
increasing manufacturing and distribution costs.
|
We are
subject to impairment charges due to potential declines in the
fair value of our assets.
As a result of our acquisitions, particularly that of Lipman, we
have significant goodwill on our balance sheet. We test that
goodwill for impairment on a periodic basis as required at least
annually and whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. The
events or changes that could require us to test our goodwill for
impairment include a reduction in our stock price and market
capitalization and changes in our estimated future cash flows,
as well as changes in rates of growth in our industry or in any
of our reporting units. If we determine that goodwill is
impaired in any of our reporting units, we may be required to
record a significant charge to earnings which would adversely
affect our financial results and could also materially adversely
affect our business.
The
government tax benefits that our Israeli subsidiary currently
receives require it to meet several conditions and may be
terminated or reduced in the future, which would impact the
timing of cash tax payments for previously accrued
taxes.
Our principal subsidiary in Israel (formerly Lipman) has
received tax benefits under Israeli law for capital investments
that are designated as Approved Enterprises. Lipman
received such tax benefits of approximately $0.1 million in
2007, zero in 2006, and $4.0 million in 2005. To maintain
our eligibility for these tax benefits, we must continue to meet
conditions, including making specified investments in property,
plant, and equipment, and continuing to manufacture in Israel.
If we do not comply with these conditions in the future, the
benefits received could be cancelled or reduced and we could be
required to pay increased taxes or refund the amounts of the tax
benefits Lipman received in the past, together with interest and
penalties. Also, an increase in our assembly of products outside
of Israel may be construed as a failure to comply with these
conditions. These tax benefits may not continue in the future at
the current levels or at all. The termination or reduction of
these tax benefits, or our inability to qualify for new
programs, could adversely affect our results of operations. Our
principal subsidiary in Israel has undistributed earnings of
approximately $133 million, the vast majority of which are
attributable to Lipmans Approved Enterprise programs. As
such these earnings were not subject to Israeli statutory
corporate tax at the time they were generated. To the extent
that these earnings are distributed to the United States in the
future, our Israeli subsidiary would be required to pay
corporate tax at the rate ordinarily applicable to such earnings
(currently between 10% and 25%) along with a 15% withholding
tax. As of October 31, 2007, the Company has accrued
$40.5 million for taxes associated with future
distributions of Israeli earnings.
17
We
face risks related to our recent migration to a common
enterprise resource planning information system to integrate all
business and finance activities.
We recently migrated the majority of our business and finance
activities to a new enterprise resource planning information
system, which replaced our previous systems. Due to the size and
complexity of our business, including the acquisition of Lipman,
the conversion process will continue to be very challenging. Any
disruptions and problems that occur during the system conversion
could adversely impact our ability to finish the conversion in a
timely and cost effective way or the quality and reliability of
the information generated by the new system. Even if we do
succeed, the implementation of the remaining phases, and the
optimization of the already installed phases may be much more
costly than we anticipated. If we are unable to successfully
complete implementation of our new information system as
planned, in addition to adversely impacting our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows in the short and
long term, it could also affect our ability to collect the
information necessary to timely and accurately file our
financial reports with the SEC.
We
depend upon third parties to physically manufacture many of our
systems and to supply the components necessary to manufacture
our products.
Prior to the Lipman acquisition, VeriFone did not directly
manufacture the physical systems we design which form part of
our System Solutions. In addition, Lipman did not manufacture
systems it sold in Brazil or a majority of the systems designed
by its Dione subsidiary. We arrange for a limited number of
third parties to manufacture these systems under contract and
pursuant to our specifications. Components such as application
specific integrated circuits, or ASICs, payment processors,
wireless modules, modems, and printer mechanisms that are
necessary to manufacture and assemble our systems are sourced
either directly by us or on our behalf by our contract
manufacturers from a variety of component suppliers selected by
us. If our suppliers are unable to deliver the quantities that
we require, we would be faced with a shortage of critical
components. We also experience from time to time an increase in
the lead time for delivery of some of our key components. We may
not be able to find alternative sources in a timely manner if
suppliers of our key components become unwilling or unable to
provide us with adequate supplies of these key components when
we need them or if they increase their prices. If we are unable
to obtain sufficient key required components, or to develop
alternative sources if and as required in the future, or to
replace our component and factory tooling for our products in a
timely manner if they are damaged or destroyed, we could
experience delays or reductions in product shipments. This could
harm our relationships with our customers and cause our revenues
to decline. Even if we are able to secure alternative sources or
replace our tooling in a timely manner, our costs could
increase. For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, over
half of our component spending was for components we sourced
from a single supplier or a small number of suppliers.
We
have significant operations in Israel and therefore our results
of operations may be adversely affected by political or economic
instability or military operations in or around
Israel.
We have offices and a manufacturing facility in Israel and many
of our suppliers are located in Israel. Therefore, political,
economic, and military conditions in Israel directly affect our
operations. The future of peace efforts between Israel and its
Arab neighbors remains uncertain. Any armed conflicts or further
political instability in the region is likely to negatively
affect business conditions and adversely affect our results of
operations. Furthermore, several countries continue to restrict
or ban business with Israel and Israeli companies. These
restrictive laws and policies may seriously limit our ability to
make sales in those countries.
In addition, many employees in Israel are obligated to perform
at least 30 days and up to 40 days, depending on rank
and position, of military reserve duty annually and are subject
to being called for active duty under emergency circumstances.
If a military conflict or war arises, these individuals could be
required to serve in the military for extended periods of time.
Our operations in Israel could be disrupted by the absence for a
significant period of one or more key employees or a significant
number of other employees due to military service. Any
disruption in our operations in Israel could materially
adversely affect our business.
18
We
depend on our manufacturing and warehouse facility in Israel. If
operations at this facility are interrupted for any reason,
there could be a material adverse effect on our results of
operations.
We currently assemble and test a majority of our NURIT products
and some of our Dione products at our manufacturing facility
located in Israel. Component and limited finished product
inventories are also stored at this facility. Disruption of the
manufacturing process at this facility or damage to it, whether
as a result of fire, natural disaster, act of war, terrorist
attack, or otherwise, could materially affect our ability to
deliver products on a timely basis and could materially
adversely affect our results of operations. We also assemble
some of our NURIT products in Brazil. To the extent products are
manufactured by third parties in additional countries, we may
become more dependent on
third-party
manufacturers to produce and deliver products sold in these
markets on a timely basis and at an acceptable cost.
We
depend on a limited number of customers, including distributors
and resellers, for sales of a large percentage of our System
Solutions. If we do not effectively manage our relationships
with them, our net revenues and operating results will
suffer.
We sell a significant portion of our solutions through third
parties such as independent distributors, independent sales
organizations, or ISOs, value-added resellers, and payment
processors. We depend on their active marketing and sales
efforts. These third parties also provide after-sales support
and related services to end user customers. When we introduce
new applications and solutions, they also provide critical
support for developing and porting the custom software
applications to run on our various electronic payment systems
and, internationally, in obtaining requisite certifications in
the markets in which they are active. Accordingly, the pace at
which we are able to introduce new solutions in markets in which
these parties are active depends on the resources they dedicate
to these tasks. Moreover, our arrangements with these third
parties typically do not prevent them from selling products of
other companies, including our competitors, and they may elect
to market our competitors products and services in
preference to our system solutions. If one or more of our major
resellers terminates or otherwise adversely changes its
relationship with us, we may be unsuccessful in replacing it.
The loss of one of our major resellers could impair our ability
to sell our solutions and result in lower revenues and income.
It could also be time consuming and expensive to replicate,
either directly or through other resellers, the certifications
and the custom applications owned by these third parties.
A significant percentage of our net revenues is attributable to
a limited number of customers, including distributors and ISOs.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, VeriFones
ten largest customers accounted for approximately 30.8% of
VeriFones net revenues. No customer accounted for more
than 10% of VeriFones net revenues in that period. If any
of our large customers significantly reduces or delays purchases
from us or if we are required to sell products to them at
reduced prices or on other terms less favorable to us, our
revenues and income could be materially adversely affected.
A
majority of our net revenues is generated outside of the United
States and we intend to continue to expand our operations
internationally. Our results of operations could suffer if we
are unable to manage our international expansion and operations
effectively.
During the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, 61% of our
net revenues were generated outside of the United States.
We expect our percentage of net revenues generated outside of
the United States to continue to increase in the coming years.
Part of our strategy is to expand our penetration in existing
foreign markets and to enter new foreign markets. Our ability to
penetrate some international markets may be limited due to
different technical standards, protocols or product
requirements. Expansion of our international business will
require significant management attention and financial
resources. Our international net revenues will depend on our
continued success in the following areas:
|
|
|
|
|
securing commercial relationships to help establish our presence
in international markets;
|
|
|
|
hiring and training personnel capable of marketing, installing
and integrating our solutions, supporting customers, and
managing operations in foreign countries;
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
localizing our solutions to target the specific needs and
preferences of foreign customers, which may differ from our
traditional customer base in the United States;
|
|
|
|
building our brand name and awareness of our services among
foreign customers; and
|
|
|
|
implementing new systems, procedures, and controls to monitor
our operations in new markets.
|
In addition, we are subject to risks associated with operating
in foreign countries, including:
|
|
|
|
|
multiple, changing, and often inconsistent enforcement of laws
and regulations;
|
|
|
|
satisfying local regulatory or industry imposed security or
other certification requirements;
|
|
|
|
competition from existing market participants that may have a
longer history in and greater familiarity with the foreign
markets we enter;
|
|
|
|
tariffs and trade barriers;
|
|
|
|
laws and business practices that favor local competitors;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in currency exchange rates;
|
|
|
|
extended payment terms and the ability to collect accounts
receivable;
|
|
|
|
economic and political instability in foreign countries;
|
|
|
|
imposition of limitations on conversion of foreign currencies
into U.S. dollars or remittance of dividends and other
payments by foreign subsidiaries;
|
|
|
|
changes in a specific countrys or regions political
or economic conditions; and
|
|
|
|
greater difficulty in safeguarding intellectual property in
areas such as China, Russia, and Latin America.
|
In addition, compliance with foreign and U.S. laws and
regulations that are applicable to our international operations
is complex and may increase our cost of doing business in
international jurisdictions and our international operations
could expose us to fines and penalties if we fail to comply with
these regulations. These laws and regulations include import and
export requirements, U.S. laws such as the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, and local laws prohibiting corrupt payments to
governmental officials. Although we have implemented policies
and procedures designed to ensure compliance with these laws,
there can be no assurance that our employees, contractors, and
agents will not take actions in violation of our policies,
particularly as we expand our operations through organic growth
and acquisitions. Any such violations could subject us to civil
or criminal penalties, including substantial fines or
prohibitions on our ability to offer our products and services
to one or more countries, and could also materially damage our
reputation, our brand, our international expansion efforts, our
business, and our operating results. In addition, if we fail to
address the challenges and risks associated with international
expansion and acquisition strategy, we may encounter
difficulties implementing our strategy, which could impede our
growth or harm our operating results.
Our
quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly as a
result of factors outside of our control, which could cause the
market price of our common stock to decline.
We expect our revenues and operating results to vary from
quarter to quarter. As a consequence, our operating results in
any single quarter may not meet the expectations of securities
analysts and investors, which could cause the price of our
common stock to decline. Factors that may affect our operating
results include:
|
|
|
|
|
the type, timing, and size of orders and shipments;
|
|
|
|
demand for and acceptance of our new product offerings;
|
|
|
|
delays in the implementation and delivery of our products and
services, which may impact the timing of our recognition of
revenues;
|
|
|
|
variations in product mix and cost during any period;
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
development of new relationships and maintenance and enhancement
of existing relationships with customers and strategic partners;
|
|
|
|
component supplies, manufacturing, or distribution difficulties;
|
|
|
|
deferral of customer contracts in anticipation of product or
service enhancements;
|
|
|
|
timing of commencement, implementation, or completion of major
implementations projects;
|
|
|
|
timing of governmental, statutory and industry association
requirements;
|
|
|
|
the relative mix of North America and International net revenues;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in currency exchange rates;
|
|
|
|
the fixed nature of many of our expenses; and
|
|
|
|
industry and economic conditions, including competitive
pressures and inventory obsolescence.
|
In particular, differences in relative growth rates between our
businesses in North America and internationally may have a
significant effect on our operating results, particularly our
reported gross profit percentage, in any individual quarter,
with International sales carrying lower margins.
In addition, we have in the past and may continue to experience
periodic variations in sales to our key vertical and
international markets. These periodic variations occur
throughout the year and may lead to fluctuations in our
quarterly operating results depending on the impact of any given
market during that quarter and could lead to volatility in our
stock price.
Our
North American and International operations are not equally
profitable, which may promote volatility in our earnings and may
adversely impact future growth in our earnings.
Our International sales of System Solutions tend to carry lower
average selling prices and therefore have lower gross margins
than our sales in North America. As a result, if we successfully
expand our International sales, any improvement in our results
of operations will likely not be as favorable as an expansion of
similar magnitude in the United States and Canada. In addition,
we are unable to predict for any future period our proportion of
revenues that will result from International sales versus sales
in North America. Variations in this proportion from period to
period may lead to volatility in our results of operations
which, in turn, may depress the trading price of our common
stock.
Fluctuations
in currency exchange rates may adversely affect our results of
operations.
A substantial portion of our business consists of sales made to
customers outside the United States. A portion of the net
revenues we receive from such sales is denominated in currencies
other than the U.S. dollar. Additionally, portions of our
cost of net revenues and our other operating expenses are
incurred by our International operations and denominated in
local currencies. Fluctuations in the value of these net
revenues, costs and expenses as measured in U.S. dollars
have affected our results of operations historically, and
adverse currency exchange rate fluctuations may have a material
impact in the future. In addition, our balance sheet reflects
non-U.S. dollar
denominated assets and liabilities, primarily intercompany
balances, which can be adversely affected by fluctuations in
currency exchange rates. We have entered into foreign currency
forward contracts and other arrangements intended to hedge our
exposure to adverse fluctuations in exchange rates.
Nevertheless, these hedging arrangements may not always be
effective, particularly in the event of imprecise forecasts of
non-U.S. denominated
assets and liabilities. Accordingly, if there is an adverse
movement in exchange rates, we might suffer significant losses.
Additionally, hedging programs expose us to risks that could
adversely affect our operating results, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to hedge currency risk for some transactions
because of a high level of uncertainty or the inability to
reasonably estimate our foreign exchange exposures; and
|
|
|
|
we may be unable to acquire foreign exchange hedging instruments
in some of the geographic areas where we do business, or, where
these derivatives are available, we may not be able to acquire
enough of them to fully offset our exposure.
|
21
Security
is vital to our customers and end users and therefore breaches
in the security of our solutions could adversely affect our
reputation and results of operations.
Protection against fraud is of key importance to the purchasers
and end users of our solutions. We incorporate security
features, such as encryption software and secure hardware, into
our solutions to protect against fraud in electronic payment
transactions and to ensure the privacy and integrity of consumer
data. Our solutions may be vulnerable to breaches in security
due to defects in the security mechanisms, the operating system
and applications, or the hardware platform. Security
vulnerabilities could jeopardize the security of information
transmitted or stored using our solutions. In general, liability
associated with security breaches of a certified electronic
payment system belongs to the institution that acquires the
financial transaction. However, if the security of our solutions
is compromised, our reputation and marketplace acceptance of our
solutions will be adversely affected, which would cause our
business to suffer, and we may become subject to damage claims.
Our
solutions may have defects that could result in sales delays,
delays in our collection of receivables, and claims against
us.
We offer complex solutions that are susceptible to undetected
hardware and software errors or failures. Solutions may
experience failures when first introduced, as new versions are
released, or at any time during their lifecycle. Any product
recalls as a result of errors or failures could result in the
loss of or delay in market acceptance of our solutions and
adversely affect our business and reputation. Any significant
returns or warranty claims could result in significant
additional costs to us and could adversely affect our results of
operations. Our customers may also run third-party software
applications on our electronic payment systems. Errors in
third-party applications could adversely affect the performance
of our solutions.
The existence of defects and delays in correcting them could
result in negative consequences, including the following: harm
to our brand; delays in shipping system solutions; loss of
market acceptance for our system solutions; additional warranty
expenses; diversion of resources from product development; and
loss of credibility with distributors and customers. Correcting
defects can be time consuming and in some circumstances
extremely difficult. Software errors may take several months to
correct, and hardware defects may take even longer to correct.
We may
accumulate excess or obsolete inventory that could result in
unanticipated price reductions and write-downs and adversely
affect our financial condition.
In formulating our solutions, we have focused our efforts on
providing to our customers solutions with higher levels of
functionality, which requires us to develop and incorporate
cutting edge and evolving technologies. This approach tends to
increase the risk of obsolescence for products and components we
hold in inventory and may compound the difficulties posed by
other factors that affect our inventory levels, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
the need to maintain significant inventory of components that
are in limited supply;
|
|
|
|
buying components in bulk for the best pricing;
|
|
|
|
responding to the unpredictable demand for products;
|
|
|
|
cancellation of customer orders; and
|
|
|
|
responding to customer requests for quick delivery schedules.
|
The accumulation of excess or obsolete inventory may result in
price reductions and inventory write-downs, which could
adversely affect our business and financial condition. We
incurred an obsolescence cost of $16.6 million for obsolete
inventory, scrap, and purchase commitments for excess components
at contract manufacturers during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, primarily due to the implementation of
PCI security standards which significantly reduced the markets
in which non-PCI compliant finished goods and related
accessories could be sold. In the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, we incurred an obsolescence charge of
$3.5 million primarily as a result of discontinued and
legacy financial and retail products and check readers, in
addition to the establishment of a reserve for certain memory
components that are high risk in nature as they are no longer
used in manufacturing and are only being held as future repair
stock.
22
Our
proprietary technology is difficult to protect and unauthorized
use of our proprietary technology by third parties may impair
our ability to compete effectively.
We may not be able to protect our proprietary technology, which
could enable competitors to develop services that compete with
our own. We rely on copyright, trademark, and trade secret laws,
as well as confidentiality, licensing and other contractual
arrangements to establish and protect the proprietary aspects of
our solutions. We do not own any patents that protect important
aspects of our current solutions. The laws of some countries in
which we sell our solutions and services may not protect
software and intellectual property rights to the same extent as
the laws in the United States. If we are unable to prevent
misappropriation of our technology, competitors may be able to
use and adapt our technology. Our failure to protect our
technology could diminish our competitive advantage and cause us
to lose customers to competitors.
Our
business may suffer if we are sued for infringing the
intellectual property rights of third parties, or if we are
unable to obtain rights to
third-party
intellectual property on which we depend.
Third parties have in the past asserted and may in the future
assert claims that our system solutions infringe their
proprietary rights. Such infringement claims, even if meritless,
may cause us to incur significant costs in defending those
claims. We may be required to discontinue using and selling any
infringing technology and services, to expend resources to
develop non-infringing technology or to purchase licenses or pay
royalties for other technology. Similarly, we depend on our
ability to license intellectual property from third parties.
These or other third parties may become unwilling to license to
us on acceptable terms intellectual property that is necessary
to our business. In either case, we may be unable to acquire
licenses for other technology on reasonable commercial terms or
at all. As a result, we may find that we are unable to continue
to offer the solutions and services upon which our business
depends.
We have received, and have currently pending, third-party claims
and may receive additional notices of such claims of
infringement in the future. Infringement claims may cause us to
incur significant costs in defending those claims. For example,
during 2005, VeriFone incurred approximately $1.2 million
and Lipman incurred approximately $1.5 million in expenses
in connection with the defense and settlement of proceedings
brought by Verve L.L.C. More recently, in September 2007, SPA
Syspatronic AG commenced an infringement action against us and
others and in March 2008, Cardsoft, Inc. and Cardsoft
(Assignment for the Benefit of Credits), LLC commenced an
infringement action against us and others. Infringement claims
are expensive and time consuming to defend, regardless of the
merits or ultimate outcome. Similar claims may result in
additional protracted and costly litigation. There can be no
assurance that we will continue to prevail in any such actions
or that any license required under any such patent or other
intellectual property would be made available on commercially
acceptable terms, if at all. See Item 3
Legal Proceedings.
We
face litigation risks that could force us to incur substantial
defense costs and could result in damages awards against us that
would negatively impact our business.
As described in Item 3 Legal
Proceedings, there are a number of pending litigation and
tax assessment matters each of which may be time-consuming to
resolve, expensive to defend, and disruptive to normal business
operations. The outcome of litigation is inherently difficult to
predict. An unfavorable resolution of any specific lawsuit could
have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition.
We may
not be able to attract, integrate, manage, and retain qualified
personnel.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued
contributions of our key senior management, engineering, sales
and marketing, and manufacturing personnel, many of whom would
be difficult to replace. In addition, our future success also
depends on our ability to attract, integrate, manage, and retain
highly skilled employees throughout our businesses. Competition
for some of these personnel is intense, and in the past, we have
had difficulty hiring employees in our desired time frame,
particularly qualified finance and accounting professionals. We
may be unsuccessful in attracting and retaining personnel. The
loss of the services of any of our key personnel, the inability
to attract or retain qualified personnel in the future, or
delays in hiring required personnel,
23
particularly engineers and sales personnel, could make it
difficult for us to manage our business and meet key objectives,
such as timely product introductions.
In January and July 2008, we implemented work force
reduction plans reducing the number of employees and
contractors. These reductions have also required that we
reassign certain employee duties. Workforce reductions and job
reassignments could negatively affect employee morale, and make
it difficult to motivate and retain the remaining employees and
contractors, which would affect our ability to deliver our
products in a timely fashion and otherwise negatively affect our
business.
In addition, the restatement of our historical interim financial
statements has adversely impacted our ability to attract and
retain qualified personnel and may also affect the morale and
productivity of our workforce, including as a result of the
uncertainties inherent in that process as well as our inability
to provide equity-based compensation or permit the exercise of
outstanding stock options until we have filed all of our
required reports with the SEC. Moreover, the restatement process
has adversely affected the market for our shares making our
equity compensation program potentially less attractive for
current or prospective employees.
Shipments
of electronic payment systems may be delayed by factors outside
of our control, which can harm our reputation and our
relationships with our customers.
The shipment of payment systems requires us or our
manufacturers, distributors, or other agents to obtain customs
or other government certifications and approvals, and, on
occasion, to submit to physical inspection of our systems in
transit. Failure to satisfy these requirements, and the very
process of trying to satisfy them, can lead to lengthy delays in
the delivery of our solutions to our direct or indirect
customers. Delays and unreliable delivery by us may harm our
reputation in the industry and our relationships with our
customers.
Force
majeure events, such as terrorist attacks, other acts of
violence or war, political instability, and health epidemics may
adversely affect us.
Terrorist attacks, war and international political instability,
along with health epidemics may disrupt our ability to generate
revenues. Such events may negatively affect our ability to
maintain sales revenues and to develop new business
relationships. Because a substantial and growing part of our
revenues is derived from sales and services to customers outside
of the United States and we have our electronic payment systems
manufactured outside the U.S., terrorist attacks, war and
international political instability anywhere may decrease
international demand for our products and inhibit customer
development opportunities abroad, disrupt our supply chain and
impair our ability to deliver our electronic payment systems,
which could materially adversely affect our net revenues or
results of operations. Any of these events may also disrupt
global financial markets and precipitate a decline in the price
of our common stock.
While
we believe we comply with environmental laws and regulations, we
are still exposed to potential risks associated with
environmental laws and regulations.
We are subject to other legal and regulatory requirements,
including a European Union directive that places restrictions on
the use of hazardous substances (RoHS) in electronic equipment,
a European Union directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE), and the environmental regulations promulgated
by Chinas Ministry of Information Industry (China RoHS).
RoHS sets a framework for producers obligations in
relation to manufacturing (including the amounts of named
hazardous substances contained in products sold) and WEEE sets a
framework for treatment, labeling, recovery, and recycling of
electronic products in the European Union which may require us
to alter the manufacturing of the physical devices that include
our solutions
and/or
require active steps to promote recycling of materials and
components. Although the WEEE directive has been adopted by the
European Commission, national legislation to implement the
directive is still pending in the member states of the European
Union. In addition, similar legislation could be enacted in
other jurisdictions, including in the United States. If we do
not comply with the RoHS and WEEE directives and China RoHS, we
may suffer a loss of revenue, be unable to sell in certain
markets or countries, be subject to penalties and enforced fees,
and/or
suffer a competitive disadvantage. Furthermore, the costs to
comply with RoHS and WEEE and China RoHS, or with current and
24
future environmental and worker health and safety laws may have
a material adverse effect on our results of operation, expenses
and financial condition.
We may
pursue complementary acquisitions and strategic investments,
which will involve numerous risks. We may not be able to address
these risks without substantial expense, delay or other
operational or financial problems.
We may seek to acquire or make investments in related
businesses, technologies, or products in the future.
Acquisitions or investments involve various risks, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
the difficulty of integrating the technologies, operations, and
personnel of the acquired business, technology or product;
|
|
|
|
the potential disruption of our ongoing business, including the
diversion of management attention;
|
|
|
|
the possible inability to obtain the desired financial and
strategic benefits from the acquisition or investment;
|
|
|
|
loss of customers;
|
|
|
|
the risk that increasing complexity inherent in operating a
larger business may impact the effectiveness of our internal
controls and adversely affect our financial reporting processes;
|
|
|
|
assumption of unanticipated liabilities;
|
|
|
|
the loss of key employees of an acquired business; and
|
|
|
|
the possibility of our entering markets in which we have limited
prior experience.
|
Future acquisitions and investments could also result in
substantial cash expenditures, potentially dilutive issuance of
our equity securities, our incurring of additional debt and
contingent liabilities, and amortization expenses related to
other intangible assets that could adversely affect our
business, operating results, and financial condition. We depend
on the retention and performance of existing management and
employees of acquired businesses for the day-to-day management
and future operating results of these businesses.
Risks
Related to Our Industry
Our
markets are highly competitive and subject to price
erosion.
The markets for our system solutions and services are highly
competitive, and we have been subject to price pressures.
Competition from manufacturers, distributors, or providers of
products similar to or competitive with our system solutions or
services could result in price reductions, reduced margins, and
a loss of market share or could render our solutions obsolete.
For example, First Data Corporation, a leading provider of
payments processing services, and formerly our largest customer,
has developed and continues to develop a series of proprietary
electronic payment systems for the U.S. market.
We expect to continue to experience significant and increasing
levels of competition in the future. We compete with suppliers
of cash registers that provide built in electronic payment
capabilities and producers of software that facilitates
electronic payment over the internet, as well as other
manufacturers or distributors of electronic payment systems. We
must also compete with smaller companies that have been able to
develop strong local or regional customer bases. In certain
foreign countries, some competitors are more established,
benefit from greater name recognition and have greater resources
within those countries than we do.
If we
do not continually enhance our existing solutions and develop
and market new solutions and enhancements, our net revenues and
income will be adversely affected.
The market for electronic payment systems is characterized by:
|
|
|
|
|
rapid technological change;
|
|
|
|
frequent product introductions and enhancements;
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
evolving industry and government performance and security
standards; and
|
|
|
|
changes in customer and end-user requirements.
|
Because of these factors, we must continually enhance our
existing solutions and develop and market new solutions.
We cannot be sure that we will successfully complete the
development and introduction of new solutions or enhancements or
that our new solutions will be accepted in the marketplace. We
may also fail to develop and deploy new solutions and
enhancements on a timely basis. In either case, we may lose
market share to our competitors, and our net revenues and
results of operations could suffer.
We
must adhere to industry and government regulations and standards
and therefore sales will suffer if we cannot comply with
them.
Our system solutions must meet industry standards imposed by
EMVCo LLC, Visa, MasterCard, and other credit card associations
and standard setting organizations. New standards are
continually being adopted or proposed as a result of worldwide
anti-fraud initiatives, the increasing need for system
compatibility and technology developments such as wireless and
wireline IP communication. Our solutions also must comply with
government regulations, including those imposed by
telecommunications authorities and independent standards groups
worldwide regarding emissions, radiation, and connections with
telecommunications and radio networks. We cannot be sure that we
will be able to design our solutions to comply with future
standards or regulations on a timely basis, if at all.
Compliance with these standards could increase the cost of
developing or producing our solutions. New products designed to
meet any new standards need to be introduced to the market and
ordinarily need to be certified by the credit card associations
and our customers before being purchased. The certification
process is costly and time consuming and increases the amount of
time it takes to sell our products. Our business and financial
condition could be adversely affected if we cannot comply with
new or existing industry standards, or obtain or retain
necessary regulatory approval or certifications in a timely
fashion, or if compliance results in increasing the cost of our
products. Selling products that are non-compliant may result in
fines against us or our customers, which we may be liable to pay.
Risks
Related to Our Capital Structure
Our
secured credit facility contains restrictive and financial
covenants and, if we are unable to comply with these covenants,
we will be in default. A default could result in the
acceleration of our outstanding indebtedness, which would have
an adverse effect on our business and stock price.
On October 31, 2006, we entered into a secured credit
agreement consisting of a Term B Loan facility of
$500 million and a revolving credit facility permitting
borrowings of up to $40 million (the Credit
Facility). The proceeds from the Term B loan were used to
repay all outstanding amounts relating to an existing senior
secured credit agreement, pay certain transaction costs, and
partially fund the cash consideration in connection with the
acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006. Through
October 31, 2007, we had repaid an aggregate of
$263.8 million, leaving a Term B Loan balance of
$236.2 million at October 31, 2007.
Our Credit Facility contains customary covenants that require
our subsidiaries to maintain certain specified financial ratios
and restrict their ability to make certain distributions with
respect to their capital stock, prepay other debt, encumber
their assets, incur additional indebtedness, make capital
expenditures above specified levels, engage in certain business
combinations, or undertake various other corporate activities.
Therefore, as a practical matter, these covenants restrict our
ability to engage in or benefit from such activities. In
addition, we have, in order to secure repayment of our Credit
Facility, pledged substantially all of our assets and
properties. This pledge may reduce our operating flexibility
because it restricts our ability to dispose of these assets or
engage in other transactions that may be beneficial to us.
In connection with our restatement process, we sought and
obtained an initial amendment to our Credit Facility delaying
our obligation to provide required financial reports until
April 30, 2008. In connection with the initial amendment we
paid to the consenting lenders an amendment fee aggregating
approximately $0.7 million and we also agreed to an
increase in the interest rate payable on our term loan of 0.25%
per year. On April 28, 2008, we
26
sought and obtained a second amendment to our Credit Facility to
further delay our obligation to provide required financial
reports until July 31, 2008. In connection with the second
amendment, we paid to the consenting lenders an additional
amendment fee aggregating approximately $0.7 million. We
also agreed to an increase in the interest rate payable on our
term loan and any revolving commitments of 0.75% per year, an
increase of 0.125% per year to the commitment fee for unused
revolving commitments and an increase of 0.75% per year to the
letter of credit fees. On July 31, 2008, we sought and
obtained a third amendment to our Credit Facility to further
delay our obligation to provide required financial reports until
August 31, 2008. In connection with the third amendment, we
paid to the consenting lenders an additional amendment fee
aggregating approximately $0.3 million. If we are unable to
comply with the covenants in our Credit Facility, we will be in
default, which could result in the acceleration of our
outstanding indebtedness. If acceleration occurs, we may not be
able to repay our debt and it is unlikely that we would be able
to borrow sufficient additional funds to refinance our debt.
Even if new financing is made available to us, it may not be
available on acceptable terms. If we were to default in
performance under the Credit Facility we may pursue an amendment
or waiver of the Credit Facility with our existing lenders, but
there can be no assurance that the lenders would grant another
amendment and waiver and, in light of current credit market
conditions, any such amendment or waiver may be on terms,
including additional fees, as well as increased interest rates
and other more stringent terms and conditions that are
materially disadvantageous to us.
Our
indebtedness and debt service obligations will increase under
our Credit Facility, which may adversely affect our cash flow,
cash position, and stock price.
We intend to fulfill our debt service obligations under our
Credit Facility from existing cash, investments and operations.
In the future, if we are unable to generate cash or raise
additional cash financings sufficient to meet these obligations
and need to use more of our existing cash than planned or to
liquidate investments in order to fund these obligations, we may
have to delay or curtail the development and or the sales and
marketing of new payment systems.
Our indebtedness could have significant additional negative
consequences, including, without limitation:
|
|
|
|
|
requiring the dedication of a significant portion of our
expected cash flow to service the indebtedness, thereby reducing
the amount of expected cash flow available for other purposes,
including capital expenditures;
|
|
|
|
increasing our vulnerability to general adverse economic
conditions;
|
|
|
|
limiting our ability to obtain additional financing; and
|
|
|
|
placing us at a possible competitive disadvantage to less
leveraged competitors and competitors that have better access to
capital resources.
|
Any
modification of the accounting guidelines for convertible debt
could result in higher interest expense related to our
convertible debt, which could materially impact our results of
operations and earnings per share.
In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
APB 14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement). FSP APB
14-1
requires the issuer of convertible debt instruments with cash
settlement features to account separately for the liability and
equity components of the instrument. The debt would be
recognized at the present value of its cash flows discounted
using the issuers nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at
the time of issuance. The equity component would be recognized
as the difference between the proceeds from the issuance of the
note and the fair value of the liability. The FSP also requires
accretion of the resultant debt discount over the expected life
of the debt. The FSP is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those
years. Entities are required to apply the FSP retrospectively
for all periods presented. We are currently evaluating FSP APB
14-1 and
have not yet determined the impact its adoption will have on our
consolidated financial statements. However, the impact of this
new accounting treatment will be significant and will result in
a significant increase to non-cash interest expense beginning in
fiscal year 2010 for financial statements covering past and
future periods.
27
Some
provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may
delay or prevent transactions that many stockholders may
favor.
Some provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws
may have the effect of delaying, discouraging or preventing a
merger or acquisition that our stockholders may consider
favorable, including transactions in which stockholders might
receive a premium for their shares. These provisions include:
|
|
|
|
|
authorization of the issuance of blank check
preferred stock without the need for action by stockholders;
|
|
|
|
the removal of directors or amendment of our organizational
documents only by the affirmative vote of the holders of
two-thirds of the shares of our capital stock entitled to vote;
|
|
|
|
provision that any vacancy on the board of directors, however
occurring, including a vacancy resulting from an enlargement of
the board, may only be filled by vote of the directors then in
office;
|
|
|
|
inability of stockholders to call special meetings of
stockholders, although stockholders are permitted to act by
written consent; and
|
|
|
|
advance notice requirements for board nominations and proposing
matters to be acted on by stockholders at stockholder meetings.
|
Our
share price has been volatile and we expect that the price of
our common stock may continue to fluctuate
substantially.
Our stock price has fluctuated substantially since our initial
public offering and more recently since the announcement of our
anticipated restatement in December 2007. In addition to
fluctuations related to Company-specific factors, broad market
and industry factors may adversely affect the market price of
our common stock, regardless of our actual operating
performance. Factors that could cause fluctuations in our stock
price may include, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
actual or anticipated variations in quarterly operating results;
|
|
|
|
changes in financial estimates by us or by any securities
analysts who might cover our stock, or our failure to meet the
estimates made by securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
changes in the market valuations of other companies operating in
our industry;
|
|
|
|
announcements by us or our competitors of significant
acquisitions, strategic partnerships or divestitures;
|
|
|
|
additions or departures of key personnel; and
|
|
|
|
sales of our common stock, including sales of our common stock
by our directors and officers or by our principal stockholders.
|
As of July 31, 2008, we have approximately
84,194,231 shares of our common stock outstanding and
11,031,138 shares reserved for issuance under our equity
compensation plans. We have 100 million shares of common
stock authorized under our certificate of incorporation. We are
obligated under the terms of our convertible notes to seek an
increase in the authorized number of shares of our common stock.
We will seek such an increase in connection with our 2008 annual
meeting of stockholders. If we are unsuccessful in increasing
our authorized capital, we will be required to pay additional
interest on our convertible notes. We will also be unable to
provide additional equity compensation to our existing and new
employees, which could materially adversely affect our business.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
None.
28
Our headquarters are located in San Jose, California.
Warehouse and distribution facilities are located in the U.S.,
Israel, United Kingdom, Turkey, Singapore, China, and Brazil.
The warehouse and distribution space is leased and totals
approximately 288,000 square feet.
We also maintain research facilities and sales and
administrative offices in the U.S. at approximately
11 locations in eight states or jurisdictions and outside
the U.S. at approximately 35 locations in 18 countries. All
of these locations are leased. We are using substantially all of
our currently available productive space to develop,
manufacture, market, sell and distribute our products. Our
facilities are in good operating condition, suitable for their
respective uses and adequate for current needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
Location
|
|
Square Footage
|
|
|
Corporate Headquarters:
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
17,443
|
|
Warehouse and Distribution Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
155,610
|
|
International
|
|
|
132,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,987
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales office or Research and Development:
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
|
241,300
|
|
International
|
|
|
153,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394,857
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
Class Action
and Derivative Lawsuits
On or after December 4, 2007, several securities class
action claims were filed against us and certain of our officers.
The various complaints specify different class periods, with the
longest proposed class period being August 31, 2006 through
December 3, 2007. These lawsuits have been consolidated in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Securities
Litigation, C
07-6140 MHP.
The original actions were: Eichenholtz v. VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6140 MHP;
Lien v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al.,
C 07-6195
JSW; Vaughn et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et
al., C
07-6197 VRW
(Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this complaint on
March 7, 2008); Feldman et al. v. VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6218 MMC;
Cerini v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6228 SC;
Westend Capital Management LLC v. VeriFone Holdings,
Inc. et al.,
C 07-6237 MMC;
Hill v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6238 MHP;
Offutt v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al.,
C 07-6241
JSW; Feitel v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al., C
08-0118 CW.
On March 17, 2008, the Court held a hearing on
Plaintiffs motions for Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel and
in May 2008, the Court requested additional briefing on these
matters, which was submitted in June 2008. We currently expect
that, following the Courts order appointing Lead Plaintiff
and Lead Counsel, a Consolidated Complaint will be filed. Each
of the consolidated actions alleges, among other things,
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and
Rule 10b-5
thereunder, based on allegations that we and the individual
defendants made false or misleading public statements regarding
our business and operations during the putative class periods
and seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. At this
time, we have not recorded any liabilities as we are unable to
estimate any potential liability.
Beginning on December 13, 2007, several derivative actions
were also filed against certain current and former directors and
officers. These derivative lawsuits were filed in: (1) the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California, as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Shareholder
Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. C
07-6347,
which consolidates King v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 07-CV-6347),
Hilborn v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al. (Case
No. 08-CV-1132),
Patel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 08-CV-1133),
and Lemmond, et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc.,
29
et al. (Case
No. 08-CV-1301);
and (2) California Superior Court, Santa Clara County,
as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Derivative Litigation,
Lead Case
No. 1-07-CV-100980,
which consolidates Catholic Medical Mission Board v.
Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 1-07-CV-100980),
and Carpel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 1-07-CV-101449).
The complaints allege, among other things, that certain of our
current and former directors and officers breached their
fiduciary duties to us and violated provisions of the California
Corporations Code and certain common law doctrines by engaging
in alleged wrongful conduct complained of in the securities
class action litigation described above. We are named solely as
a nominal defendant against whom the plaintiffs seek no
recovery. Amended consolidated complaints are expected to be
filed in September 2008 in each set of consolidated cases.
On January 27, 2008, a class action complaint was filed
against us in the Central District Court in Tel Aviv, Israel on
behalf of purchasers of our stock on the Tel Aviv Stock
Exchange. The complaint seeks compensation for damages allegedly
incurred by the class of plaintiffs due to the publication of
erroneous financial reports. On May 25, 2008, the Court
held a hearing on our motion to dismiss or stay the proceedings,
after which the Court requested that the plaintiff and we submit
additional information to the Court with respect to the
applicability of Israeli law to dually registered companies.
This additional information was submitted to the Court in June
2008 and the parties are currently awaiting the Courts
ruling on this issue. At this time, we have not recorded any
liabilities as we are unable to estimate the potential
liabilities.
The foregoing cases are still in the preliminary stages, and we
are not able to quantify the extent of our potential liability,
if any. An unfavorable outcome in any of these matters could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, and results of operations. In addition, defending
this litigation is likely to be costly and may divert
managements attention from the day-to-day operations of
our business.
Regulatory
Actions
We have responded to inquiries and provided information and
documents related to the restatement of our fiscal year 2007
interim financial statements to the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the Department of Justice, the New York Stock
Exchange, and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The SEC has
also expressed an interest in interviewing several of our
current and former officers and employees, and we are continuing
to cooperate with the SEC in responding to the SECs
requests for information. We are unable to predict what
consequences, if any, any investigation by any regulatory agency
may have on us. There is no assurance that other regulatory
inquiries will not be commenced by other U.S. federal,
state or foreign regulatory agencies.
Brazilian
State Tax Assessments
One of our Brazilian subsidiaries has been notified of a tax
assessment regarding Brazilian state value added tax
(VAT), for the periods from January 2000 to December
2001 that relates to products supplied to us by a contract
manufacturer. The assessment relates to an asserted deficiency
of 8.3 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$4.7 million) including interest and penalties. The tax
assessment was based on a clerical error in which our Brazilian
subsidiary omitted the required tax exemption number on its
invoices. Management does not expect that we will ultimately
incur a material liability in respect of this assessment,
because they believe, based in part on advice of our Brazilian
tax counsel, that we are likely to prevail in the proceedings
relating to this assessment. On May 25, 2005, we had an
administrative hearing with respect to this audit. Management
expects to receive the decision of the administrative body
sometime in 2008. In the event we receive an adverse ruling from
the administrative body, we will decide whether or not to appeal
and would reexamine the determination as to whether an accrual
is necessary. It is currently uncertain what impact this state
tax examination may have with respect to our use of a
corresponding exemption to reduce the Brazilian federal VAT.
Two of our Brazilian subsidiaries that were acquired as a part
of the Lipman acquisition have been notified of assessments
regarding Brazilian customs penalties that relate to alleged
infractions in the importation of goods. The assessments were
issued by the Federal Revenue Department in the City of
Vitória, the City of São Paulo, and the City of
Itajai. The assessments relate to asserted deficiencies totaling
26.9 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$15.3 million) excluding interest. The tax authorities
allege that the structure used for the importation of goods was
simulated with the objective of evading taxes levied on the
importation by under-invoicing the imported goods; the
30
tax authorities allege that the simulation was created through a
fraudulent interposition of parties, where the real sellers and
buyers of the imported goods were hidden.
In the Vitória tax assessment, the fines were reduced from
4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$2.7 million) to 1.5 million Brazilian reais
(approximately $0.8 million) on a first level
administrative decision on January 26, 2007. The proceeding
has been remitted to the Taxpayers Council to adjudicate the
appeal of the first level administrative decision filed by the
tax authorities. We also appealed the first level administrative
decision on February 26, 2007. In this appeal, we argued
that the tax authorities did not have enough evidence to
determine that the import transactions were indeed fraudulent
and that, even if there were some irregularities in such
importations, they could not be deemed to be our responsibility
since all the transactions were performed by the
third-party
importer of the goods. Management expects to receive the
decision of the Taxpayers Council sometime in 2008. In the event
we receive an adverse ruling from the Taxpayers Council, we will
decide whether or not to appeal to the judicial level. Based on
our current understanding of the underlying facts, we believe
that it is probable that its Brazilian subsidiary will be
required to pay some amount of fines. At October 31, 2007,
we have accrued 4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$2.7 million), excluding interest, which we believe is the
probable payment.
On July 12, 2007, we were notified of a first
administrative level decision rendered in the São Paulo tax
assessment, which maintained the total fine of 20.2 million
Brazilian reais (approximately $11.5 million) imposed. On
August 10, 2007, we appealed the first administrative level
decision to the Taxpayers Council. A hearing was held on
August 12, 2008 before the Taxpayers Council, but the
Taxpayers Council did not render a decision pending its further
review of the records. Management expects to receive the
decision of the Taxpayers Council sometime in 2008. In the event
we receive an adverse ruling from the Taxpayers Council, we will
decide whether or not to appeal to the judicial level. Based on
our current understanding of the underlying facts, we believe
that it is probable that our Brazilian subsidiary will be
required to pay some amount of fines. Accordingly, at
October 31, 2007, we have accrued 20.2 million
Brazilian reais (approximately $11.5 million), excluding
interest.
On May 22, 2008, we were notified of a first administrative
level decision rendered in the Itajai assessment, which
maintained the total fine of 2.0 million Brazilian reais
(approximately $1.1 million) imposed, excluding interest.
On May 27, 2008, we appealed the first level administrative
level decision to the Taxpayers Council. Based on our current
understanding of the underlying facts, we believe that it is
probable that our Brazilian subsidiary will be required to pay
some amount of fines. Accordingly, at October 31, 2007, we
have accrued 2.0 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$1.1 million), excluding interest.
Department
of Justice Investigation
On December 11, 2006, we received a civil investigative
demand from the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) regarding an investigation into its
acquisition of Lipman which requests certain documents and other
information, principally with respect to the Companys
integration plans and communications prior to the completion of
this acquisition. We produced documents and certain current and
former employees provided information to a representative of the
DOJ in response to this request. We are not aware of any
violations in connection with the matters that are the subject
of the investigation. On June 20, 2008, our counsel
received written confirmation from the DOJ that it had closed
this investigation.
SPA
Syspatronic AG v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc.,
et al.
On September 18, 2007, SPA Syspatronic AG (SPA)
commenced an action in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against us and
others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent
No. 5,093,862 purportedly owned by SPA. The plaintiff is
seeking a judgment of infringement, an injunction against
further infringement, damages, interest, and attorneys
fees. We filed an answer and counterclaims on November 8,
2007, and intend to vigorously defend this litigation. On
January 28, 2008, we requested that the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office (the PTO) perform a
re-examination of the patent. The PTO granted the request on
April 4, 2008. We then filed a motion to stay the
proceedings with the Court and on April 25, 2008, the Court
agreed to stay the proceedings pending the re-examination.
31
Cardsoft,
Inc. et al v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc.,
et al.
On March 6, 2008, Cardsoft, Inc. and Cardsoft (Assignment
for the Benefit of Creditors), LLC (Cardsoft)
commenced an action in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against us and
others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents
No. 6,934,945 and No. 7,302,683 purportedly owned by
Cardsoft. The plaintiff is seeking a judgment of infringement,
an injunction against further infringement, damages, interest,
and attorneys fees. We intend to vigorously defend this
litigation.
From time to time, we are subject to other legal proceedings
related to commercial, customer, and employment matters that
have arisen during the ordinary course of its business. Although
there can be no assurance as to the ultimate disposition of
these matters, our management has determined, based upon the
information available at the date of these financial statements,
that the expected outcome of these matters, individually or in
the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash
flows.
|
|
ITEM 4.
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
There were no matters submitted to a vote of our security
holders during the fourth quarter of our fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007.
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET
FOR THE REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
Our common stock has been quoted on the New York Stock Exchange
under the symbol PAY since April 29, 2005.
Prior to that time, there was no public market for our stock.
The following table sets forth for the indicated periods, the
high and low sale prices of our common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2007 Quarter Ended
|
|
Fiscal 2006 Quarter Ended
|
|
|
Jan. 31
|
|
Apr. 30
|
|
Jul. 31
|
|
Oct. 31
|
|
Jan. 31
|
|
Apr. 30
|
|
Jul. 31
|
|
Oct. 31
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
High
|
|
$
|
40.82
|
|
|
$
|
42.72
|
|
|
$
|
38.94
|
|
|
$
|
50.00
|
|
|
$
|
28.55
|
|
|
$
|
33.56
|
|
|
$
|
33.50
|
|
|
$
|
29.55
|
|
Low
|
|
$
|
29.26
|
|
|
$
|
34.84
|
|
|
$
|
31.45
|
|
|
$
|
33.03
|
|
|
$
|
21.70
|
|
|
$
|
22.85
|
|
|
$
|
25.95
|
|
|
$
|
21.21
|
|
On October 31, 2007, the closing sale price of our common
stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $49.43 and as of
July 31, 2008, the closing sale price of our common stock
on the New York Stock Exchange was $14.96. As of July 31,
2008 there were approximately 33 stockholders of record. Because
many shares of our common stock are held by brokers and other
institutions on behalf of stockholders, we are unable to
estimate the total number of stockholders represented by these
holders of record.
Dividend
Policy
We have not declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock
in our most recent three full fiscal years. We do not expect to
pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. We currently
intend to retain any future earnings to finance our operations
and growth. Any future determination to pay cash dividends will
be at the discretion of our board of directors and will be
dependent on earnings, financial condition, operating results,
capital requirements, any contractual restrictions, and other
factors that our board of directors deems relevant. In addition,
our Credit Facility contains limitations on the ability of our
principal operating subsidiary, VeriFone, Inc., to declare and
pay cash dividends. Because we conduct our business through our
subsidiaries, as a practical matter these restrictions similarly
limit our ability to pay dividends on our common stock.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation
Plans
Information with respect to Securities Authorized for Issuance
Under Equity Compensation may be found in
Item 12 Security Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder
Matters Equity Compensation Plan Information,
which section is incorporated herein by reference.
32
Performance
Graph
The following graph and table:
|
|
|
|
|
compares the performance of an investment in our common stock
over the period of April 29, 2005 through October 31,
2007, beginning with an investment at the closing market price
on April 29, 2005, the end of the first day our common
stock traded on the exchange following our initial public
offering, and thereafter, based on the closing price of our
common stock on the market, with the S&P 500 Index and a
selected peer group index (the Comparables Index).
The Comparables Index was selected on an industry basis and
includes Ingenico S.A., Hypercom Corp., International Business
Machines Corp., MICROS Systems, Inc., NCR Corp. and Radiant
Systems, Inc.
|
|
|
|
assumes $100 was invested on the start date at the price
indicated and that dividends, if any, were reinvested on the
date of payment without payment of any commissions. The
performance shown in the graph and table represent past
performance and should not be considered an indication of future
performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/29/2005
|
|
|
10/31/2005
|
|
|
10/31/2006
|
|
|
10/31/2007
|
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
232.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
292.10
|
|
|
|
$
|
494.30
|
|
S&P 500 Index
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
104.34
|
|
|
|
$
|
119.11
|
|
|
|
$
|
133.93
|
|
Comparables Index
|
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
$
|
112.71
|
|
|
|
$
|
131.58
|
|
|
|
$
|
172.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The information provided above under the heading
Performance Graph shall not be considered
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or incorporated by reference in
any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
33
|
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
The following selected consolidated financial data should be
read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements
and the accompanying notes and Item 7
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations included elsewhere in this
report. The selected data in this section is not intended to
replace the consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007(3)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
902,892
|
|
|
$
|
581,070
|
|
|
$
|
485,367
|
|
|
$
|
390,088
|
|
|
$
|
339,331
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues excluding amortization of purchased core
and developed technology assets(1)
|
|
|
565,763
|
|
|
|
313,900
|
|
|
|
281,607
|
|
|
|
231,892
|
|
|
|
200,291
|
|
Amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets
|
|
|
37,897
|
|
|
|
5,625
|
|
|
|
6,935
|
|
|
|
9,745
|
|
|
|
14,148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
603,660
|
|
|
|
319,525
|
|
|
|
288,542
|
|
|
|
241,637
|
|
|
|
214,439
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
299,232
|
|
|
|
261,545
|
|
|
|
196,825
|
|
|
|
148,451
|
|
|
|
124,892
|
|
Operating expenses:(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
65,430
|
|
|
|
47,353
|
|
|
|
41,830
|
|
|
|
33,703
|
|
|
|
28,193
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
96,295
|
|
|
|
58,607
|
|
|
|
52,231
|
|
|
|
44,002
|
|
|
|
40,024
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
80,704
|
|
|
|
42,573
|
|
|
|
29,609
|
|
|
|
25,503
|
|
|
|
25,039
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets
|
|
|
21,571
|
|
|
|
4,703
|
|
|
|
4,967
|
|
|
|
10,200
|
|
|
|
10,200
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
270,752
|
|
|
|
153,236
|
|
|
|
128,637
|
|
|
|
113,408
|
|
|
|
103,456
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
28,480
|
|
|
|
108,309
|
|
|
|
68,188
|
|
|
|
35,043
|
|
|
|
21,436
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(36,598
|
)
|
|
|
(13,617
|
)
|
|
|
(15,384
|
)
|
|
|
(12,597
|
)
|
|
|
(12,456
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
6,702
|
|
|
|
3,372
|
|
|
|
598
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(7,882
|
)
|
|
|
(6,394
|
)
|
|
|
(6,673
|
)
|
|
|
(11,869
|
)
|
|
|
3,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
91,670
|
|
|
|
46,729
|
|
|
|
10,577
|
|
|
|
12,537
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
24,718
|
|
|
|
32,159
|
|
|
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
4,971
|
|
|
|
12,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
|
59,511
|
|
|
|
33,239
|
|
|
|
5,606
|
|
|
|
241
|
|
Accrued dividends on preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,959
|
|
|
|
6,916
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
|
$
|
647
|
|
|
$
|
(6,675
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing net income (loss) per
common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
66,217
|
|
|
|
58,318
|
|
|
|
50,725
|
|
|
|
48,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
68,894
|
|
|
|
61,460
|
|
|
|
56,588
|
|
|
|
48,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends per common share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.72
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Stock-based compensation included above:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues System Solutions
|
|
$
|
2,998
|
|
|
$
|
709
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
5,937
|
|
|
|
1,194
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
8,942
|
|
|
|
2,057
|
|
|
|
663
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
11,015
|
|
|
|
2,040
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
28,892
|
|
|
$
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,687
|
|
|
$
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007(3)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
215,001
|
|
|
$
|
86,564
|
|
|
$
|
65,065
|
|
|
$
|
12,705
|
|
|
$
|
5,877
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,547,309
|
|
|
|
452,945
|
|
|
|
327,352
|
|
|
|
245,619
|
|
|
|
236,967
|
|
Long-term debt and capital leases, including current portion
|
|
|
553,152
|
|
|
|
192,889
|
|
|
|
182,806
|
|
|
|
262,187
|
|
|
|
62,634
|
|
Class A redeemable convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,210
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
580,922
|
|
|
|
98,741
|
|
|
|
26,538
|
|
|
|
(135,387
|
)
|
|
|
(39,141
|
)
|
Other Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA, as adjusted(2)
|
|
$
|
157,252
|
|
|
$
|
130,445
|
|
|
$
|
86,423
|
|
|
$
|
57,247
|
|
|
$
|
49,854
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We adopted the fair value recognition and measurement provisions
of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment,
effective May 1, 2005 using the modified-prospective
transition method. For periods prior to May 1, 2005 we
followed the intrinsic value recognition and measurement
provisions of Accounting Principles Board (APB)
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees. For further information see Note 2 to the
consolidated financial statements elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
The portion of stock-based compensation allocated to each
category of expenses for each period is presented above. |
|
(2) |
|
We define earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and
amortization, or EBITDA, as adjusted, as the sum of (1) net
income (loss) (excluding extraordinary items of gain or loss and
any gain or loss from discontinued operations),
(2) interest expense, (3) income taxes,
(4) depreciation, amortization, goodwill impairment, and
other non-recurring charges, (5) non-cash charges,
including non-cash stock-based compensation expense and purchase
accounting items, and (6) management fees to our principal
stockholder. EBITDA, as adjusted, is a primary component of the
financial covenants to which we are subject under our Credit
Facility. If we fail to maintain required levels of EBITDA, as
adjusted, we could have a default under our Credit Facility,
potentially resulting in an acceleration of all of our
outstanding indebtedness. Management uses EBITDA, as adjusted,
only in addition to and in conjunction with results presented in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP). Management believes that the use of this
non-GAAP financial measure, in conjunction with results
presented in accordance with GAAP, helps it to evaluate our
performance and to compare our current results with those for
prior periods as well as with the results of other companies in
our industry. Our competitors may, due to differences in capital
structure and investment history, have interest, tax,
depreciation, amortization, and other non-cash expenses that
differ significantly from ours. Management also uses this
non-GAAP financial measure in our budget and planning process.
Management believes that the presentation of this non-GAAP
financial measure may be useful to investors for many of the
same reasons that management finds these measures useful. |
Our EBITDA, as adjusted, contains limitations and should be
considered as a supplement to, and not as a substitute for, or
superior to, disclosures made in accordance with GAAP. EBITDA,
as adjusted, may be different from EBITDA or EBITDA, as
adjusted, calculated by other companies and is not based on any
comprehensive set of accounting rules or principles. In
addition, EBITDA, as adjusted, does not reflect all amounts and
costs, such as employee stock-based compensation costs, periodic
costs of assets used to generate net revenues and costs to
replace those assets, cash expenditures or future requirements
for capital expenditures or contractual commitments, cash
requirements for working capital needs, interest expense or the
cash requirements necessary to service interest or principal
payments on our debt, income taxes and the related cash
requirements, restructuring and impairment charges and losses
from discontinued operations, associated with our results of
operations as determined in accordance with GAAP. Furthermore,
we expect to continue to incur expenses similar to those amounts
excluded from EBITDA, as adjusted. Management compensates for
these limitations by also relying on the comparable GAAP
financial measure.
35
As noted above, management excludes the following items from
EBITDA, as adjusted:
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes. While income taxes are
directly related to the amount of pre-tax income, they are also
impacted by tax laws and the companys tax structure. As
the tax laws and our tax structure are not under the control of
our operational managers, management believes that the provision
for (benefit from) income taxes should be excluded when
evaluating our operational performance.
|
|
|
|
Interest expense and interest income. While working
capital supports the business, management does not believe that
related interest expense or interest income is directly
attributable to the operating performance of our business.
|
|
|
|
Depreciation of property, plant and equipment. Management
excludes depreciation because while tangible assets support the
business, management does not believe the related depreciation
costs are directly attributable to the operating performance of
our business. In addition, depreciation may not be indicative of
current or future capital expenditures.
|
|
|
|
Amortization of capitalized software. Management excludes
amortization of capitalized software because while capitalized
software supports the business, management does not believe the
related amortization costs are directly attributable to the
operating performance of our business. In addition, amortization
of capitalized software may not be indicative of current or
future expenditures to develop software.
|
|
|
|
Amortization of certain acquisition related items. We
incur amortization of purchased core and developed technology
assets, amortization of purchased intangible assets,
amortization of step-down in deferred revenue on acquisition,
and amortization of
step-up in
inventory on acquisition in connection with acquisitions.
Management excludes these items because it does not believe
these expenses are reflective of ongoing operating results in
the period incurred. These amounts arise from prior acquisitions
and management does not believe that they have a direct
correlation to the operation of our business.
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development. We incur IPR&D
expenses when technological feasibility for acquired technology
has not been established at the date of acquisition and no
future alternative use for such technology exists. These amounts
arise from prior acquisitions and management does not believe
they have a direct correlation to the operation of
VeriFones business.
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation. These expenses consist
primarily of expenses for employee stock options and restricted
stock units under SFAS No. 123 (R). Management
excludes stock-based compensation expenses from non-GAAP
financial measures primarily because they are non-cash expenses
which management believes are not reflective of ongoing
operating results.
|
|
|
|
Acquisition related charges and restructuring costs. This
represents charges incurred for consulting services and other
professional fees associated with acquisition related
activities. These expenses also include charges related to
restructuring activities, including costs associated with
severance, benefits, and excess facilities. As management does
not believe that these charges directly relate to the operation
of our business, management believes they should be excluded
when evaluating our operating performance.
|
|
|
|
Management fees to majority stockholder. Management
excludes management fees paid to our majority stockholder (which
were paid prior to our initial public offering) because it does
not believe that these charges directly relate to the operation
of our business.
|
|
|
|
Refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits. Management
excludes the refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits
because it does not believe these amounts directly relate to the
operation of our business.
|
|
|
|
Non-cash portion of loss on debt extinguishment. This
represents the non-cash portion of loss incurred on the
extinguishment of our credit facility. While this credit
facility supported our business, management does not believe the
related loss on extinguishment is a cost directly attributable
to the operating performance of our business.
|
36
A reconciliation of net income (loss), the most directly
comparable U.S. GAAP measure, to EBITDA, as adjusted, for
the years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003
is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
|
$
|
5,606
|
|
|
$
|
241
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
24,718
|
|
|
|
32,159
|
|
|
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
4,971
|
|
|
|
12,296
|
|
Interest expense(a)
|
|
|
36,598
|
|
|
|
13,617
|
|
|
|
15,384
|
|
|
|
12,597
|
|
|
|
12,456
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
(6,702
|
)
|
|
|
(3,372
|
)
|
|
|
(598
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of equipment and improvements
|
|
|
7,766
|
|
|
|
3,505
|
|
|
|
3,691
|
|
|
|
2,451
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
Amortization of capitalized software
|
|
|
1,220
|
|
|
|
1,231
|
|
|
|
1,173
|
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets(b)
|
|
|
59,468
|
|
|
|
10,328
|
|
|
|
11,902
|
|
|
|
19,945
|
|
|
|
24,348
|
|
Amortization of
step-up in
deferred revenue on acquisition
|
|
|
3,735
|
|
|
|
986
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
519
|
|
|
|
1,561
|
|
Amortization of
step-up in
inventory on acquisition
|
|
|
13,823
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
28,892
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
|
1,687
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
Acquisition related charges and restructuring costs
|
|
|
10,234
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management fees to majority stockholder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
Refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,820
|
)
|
Extinguishment of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
4,764
|
|
|
|
6,359
|
|
|
|
5,630
|
|
|
|
9,810
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA as adjusted
|
|
$
|
157,252
|
|
|
$
|
130,445
|
|
|
$
|
86,423
|
|
|
$
|
57,247
|
|
|
$
|
49,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
For the year ended October 31, 2007, interest expense
increased due to the increase in the balance of our debt
instruments. |
|
(b) |
|
For the year ended October 31, 2007, these expenses
increased significantly due to the acquisition of Lipman and
PayWare. |
|
(3) |
|
On November 1, 2006, we acquired Lipman. See Note 3 to
the Consolidated Financial Statements included herein. |
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
This section and other parts of this
Form 10-K
contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and
uncertainties. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be
identified by words such as anticipates,
expects, believes, plans,
predicts, and similar terms. Such forward-looking
statements are based on current expectations, estimates, and
projections about our industry, and managements beliefs
and assumptions made by management. Forward-looking statements
are not guarantees of future performance and our actual results
may differ significantly from the results discussed in the
forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such
differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in
Item 1A Risk Factors above. The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with the
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included
elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
Unless required by law, we undertake no obligation to update any
forward-looking statements, whether as result of new
information, future events, or otherwise.
Restatement
and Audit Committee Investigation
Background
On December 3, 2007, we announced that our management had
identified errors in accounting related to the valuation of
in-transit inventory and allocation of manufacturing and
distribution overhead to inventory and that as a
37
result of these errors, we anticipated that a restatement of our
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements would be
required for the following interim periods:
|
|
|
|
|
the three months ended January 31, 2007;
|
|
|
|
the three and six months ended April 30, 2007; and
|
|
|
|
the three and nine months ended July 31, 2007.
|
Our management originally estimated that the restatement would
result in changes to previously reported results as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the Three Months Ended
|
|
|
January 31,
|
|
April 30,
|
|
July 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Reduction in Inventories
|
|
$
|
7.7
|
|
|
$
|
16.5
|
|
|
$
|
30.2
|
|
Reduction in Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
8.9
|
|
|
$
|
7.0
|
|
|
$
|
13.8
|
|
Audit
Committee Investigation
On December 3, 2007, following our announcement, the Audit
Committee approved the commencement of an independent
investigation into the errors in accounting that led to the
anticipated restatement. The Audit Committee engaged independent
counsel, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP (Simpson
Thacher), to conduct the independent investigation under
the Audit Committees supervision. Simpson Thacher engaged
Navigant Consulting, Inc. (Navigant) as independent
forensic accountants. The scope of the investigation was
proposed by Simpson Thacher in consultation with Navigant and
approved by the Audit Committee. The investigation involved a
program of forensic analysis designed to investigate, among
other things:
|
|
|
|
|
the circumstances surrounding the errors identified by
management and described in our December 3, 2007
announcement;
|
|
|
|
whether additional errors existed requiring further restatement
in the interim periods of fiscal year 2007 and the adjustments
required to correct and restate our interim financial
statements; and
|
|
|
|
whether evidence existed indicating that periods prior to fiscal
year 2007 may also be required to be restated.
|
Simpson Thacher and Navigant assembled an investigative team
that ultimately consisted of approximately 70 professionals.
Information and documents were gathered from current and former
employees worldwide. Using search technology, the investigative
team evaluated over five million documents in physical and
electronic form. Navigant also reviewed relevant accounting
databases and journal entries. The investigative team also
conducted more than 25 interviews of senior executives, former
senior executives of Lipman and current and former finance,
accounting and supply chain personnel.
We announced on April 2, 2008 that the investigation was
complete and that the investigation had confirmed the existence
of the errors in accounting identified in our December 3,
2007 announcement. In particular, the investigation confirmed
that incorrect manual journal and elimination entries had been
made primarily by our Sacramento, California supply chain
accounting team with respect to several inventory-related
matters.
The investigation also concluded that existing policies with
respect to manual journal entries were not followed and that the
review processes and controls in place were not sufficient to
identify and correct the errors in a timely manner. The
investigation found no evidence that any period prior to fiscal
year 2007 required restatement.
Restatement
Concurrently with the Audit Committee investigation, we also
conducted an internal review for the purpose of restating our
fiscal year 2007 interim condensed consolidated financial
statements and preparing our fiscal year 2007 annual
consolidated financial statements and fiscal year 2008 interim
condensed consolidated financial statements. This review
included evaluations of the previously made accounting
determinations and judgments. As a result, we have also
corrected additional errors, including errors that had
previously not been corrected because
38
our management believed that individually and in the aggregate
such errors were not material to our consolidated financial
statements. Management also made additional adjustments to
reduce certain accruals which had been recorded, such as
bonuses, which were accrued based upon information which,
following the restatement, was no longer accurate.
The restatements of fiscal year 2007 interim results resulted in
the following adjustments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the Three Months Ended
|
|
|
January 31,
|
|
April 30,
|
|
July 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Reduction in Inventories
|
|
$
|
13.3
|
|
|
$
|
23.9
|
|
|
$
|
40.6
|
|
Reduction in Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
9.9
|
|
|
$
|
14.4
|
|
Reduction in Net Income
|
|
$
|
4.7
|
|
|
$
|
9.7
|
|
|
$
|
55.8
|
|
Among the most significant errors giving rise to the restatement
were:
|
|
|
|
|
manual journal entries made for the three months ended
January 31, 2007 that erroneously added manufacturing and
distribution overhead to inventory held at former Lipman
subsidiaries, notwithstanding that overhead had already been
allocated to that inventory. This duplication erroneously
increased reported inventory and reduced reported cost of net
revenues by $7.7 million in the three months ended
January 31, 2007;
|
|
|
|
manual journal entries made for the periods ended April 30,
2007 and July 31, 2007 that erroneously recorded in-transit
inventory of an additional $12.7 million at April 30,
2007 and an additional $7.3 million at July 31, 2007
based on erroneous methodology and application of source
documents; and
|
|
|
|
$6.3 million in errors made in the elimination of
intercompany profit in inventory for the nine months ended
July 31, 2007.
|
In connection with the Audit Committee investigation and
restatement process, we identified material weaknesses in our
internal control over financial reporting, as a result of which
our senior management has concluded that our internal control
over financial reporting was not effective as of
October 31, 2007. These material weaknesses and
managements remediation efforts are summarized under
Item 9A Controls and Procedures in
this Annual Report.
Overview
We are a global leader in secure electronic payment solutions.
We provide expertise, solutions, and services that add value to
the point of sale with merchant-operated, consumer-facing, and
self-service payment systems for the financial, retail,
hospitality, petroleum, government, and healthcare vertical
markets. We have one of the leading electronic payment solutions
brands and are one of the largest providers of electronic
payment systems worldwide. We believe that we benefit from a
number of competitive advantages gained through our
26-year
history and success in our industry. These advantages include
our globally trusted brand name, large installed base, history
of significant involvement in the development of industry
standards, global operating scale, customizable platform, and
investment in research and development. We believe that these
advantages position us well to capitalize on the continuing
global shift toward electronic payment transactions as well as
other long-term industry trends.
Our industrys growth continues to be driven by the
long-term
shift towards electronic payment transactions and away from cash
and checks in addition to the need for improved security
standards. Internationally, growth rates have been higher
because of the relatively low penetration rates of electronic
payment transactions in many countries and interest by
governments in modernizing their economies and using electronic
payments as a means of improving value-added tax, or VAT, and
sales tax collection. Recently, additional factors have driven
growth, including the shift from dial up to internet protocol,
or IP, based and wireless communications personal identification
number, or PIN, based debit transactions, and advances in
computing technology which enable vertical solutions and
non-payment applications to reside at the point of sale.
39
Revenues recognized in our fiscal quarters tend to be back-end
loaded as we receive sales orders and deliver our system
solutions increasingly towards the end of each fiscal quarter
including the fourth quarter. This back-end loading may
adversely affect our results of operations in a number of ways.
First, if we expect to receive sales orders that do not
materialize at the end of the fiscal quarter or if we do not
receive them in sufficient time to deliver our systems solutions
and recognize revenue in that fiscal quarter, our revenues and
profitability may be adversely affected. In addition, the
manufacturing processes at our internal manufacturing facility
could become concentrated in a shorter time period which could
increase labor and other manufacturing costs and negatively
impact gross margins. If, on the other hand, we were to hold
higher inventory levels to counteract this we would be subject
to the risk of inventory obsolescence. The concentration of
orders may also make it difficult to accurately forecast
component requirements and, as a result, we could experience a
shortage of the components needed for production, possibly
delaying shipments and causing lost orders. This could cause us
to fail to meet our revenue and operating profit expectations
for a particular quarter and could increase the fluctuation of
our quarterly results if shipments are delayed from one fiscal
quarter to the next or orders are cancelled by customers.
Security has become a driving factor in our business as our
customers endeavor to meet ever escalating governmental
statutory requirements related to the prevention of identity
theft as well as operating regulation safeguards from the credit
and debit card associations, including Visa International, or
Visa, MasterCard Worldwide, or MasterCard, American Express,
Discover Financial Services, and JCB Co., Ltd., or JCB. In 2006,
these card associations established the Payment Card Industry
Council, or PCI Council, to oversee and unify industry standards
in the areas of credit card data security, referred to as the
PCI-PED standard which consists of PIN-entry device security, or
PED, and the PCI Data Security Standard, or PCI-DSS, standard.
We operate in two business segments: North America and
International. We define North America as the United States and
Canada, and International as all other countries from which we
derive revenues.
We believe that the demand for wireless, IP enabled, PIN based
debit and more secure systems will continue worldwide. In
addition, demand in emerging economies will continue to grow as
these economies develop and seek to collect more VAT. We
continue to devote research and development resources to address
these market needs.
On November 1, 2006, we acquired Lipman Electronic
Engineering Ltd, or Lipman, and in connection with this
acquisition, we issued 13,462,474 shares of our common
stock and paid $347.4 million in cash in exchange for all
the outstanding ordinary shares of Lipman. All options to
purchase Lipman ordinary shares were exchanged for options to
purchase approximately 3.4 million shares of our common
stock. In addition, in accordance with the merger agreement,
Lipmans Board of Directors declared a special cash
dividend of $1.50 per Lipman ordinary share, or an aggregate
amount of $40.4 million. The aggregate purchase price for
this acquisition was $799.3 million.
Results
of Operations
Net
Revenues
We generate net revenues through the sale of our electronic
payment systems and solutions that enable electronic
transactions, which we identify as System Solutions, and to a
lesser extent, warranty and support services, field deployment,
installation and upgrade services, and customer specific
application development, which we identify as Services.
Net revenues, which include System Solutions and Services, are
summarized in the following table (in thousands, except
percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
Change in Dollars
|
|
|
Change in Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Systems Solutions
|
|
$
|
792,289
|
|
|
$
|
517,154
|
|
|
$
|
429,741
|
|
|
$
|
275,135
|
|
|
$
|
87,413
|
|
|
|
53.2
|
%
|
|
|
20.3
|
%
|
Services
|
|
|
110,603
|
|
|
|
63,916
|
|
|
|
55,626
|
|
|
|
46,687
|
|
|
|
8,290
|
|
|
|
73.0
|
%
|
|
|
14.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
902,892
|
|
|
$
|
581,070
|
|
|
$
|
485,367
|
|
|
$
|
321,822
|
|
|
$
|
95,703
|
|
|
|
55.4
|
%
|
|
|
19.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
System
Solutions
System Solutions net revenues increased $275.1 million, or
53%, to $792.3 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, from $517.2 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006. System Solutions net revenues
comprised 88% of total net revenues for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 compared to 89% from the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006.
International System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007 increased $213.1 million, or
90%, to $450.5 million, from $237.5 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. The increase was
largely attributable to growth across emerging economies, in
particular Brazil, Turkey, China, and Israel. Factors driving
the increase attributable to emerging economies were the
addition of the Nurit product lines, acquired in the Lipman
acquisition, and the continued desire of these countries to
modernize their infrastructure and improve collection of VAT. In
Western Europe, sales in the UK, Spain, and Italy, countries
where Lipman had a strong presence, were the primary reason for
growth. We expect that the proportion of International System
Solutions net revenues, relative to North America System
Solutions net revenues, will increase at a higher growth rate
for at least the next year. In addition, we may experience
periodic variations in sales to our International markets.
North America System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007 increased $61.5 million, or
22%, to $341.8 million, from $280.2 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. This increase was
primarily attributable to an increase in demand for wireless
products due to our customers interest in differentiating
the service they provide to merchants, and higher sales in
Canada, where customers are preparing for a transition to EMV
and Interac Chip acceptance. In addition, sales were strong in
multi-lane
retail solutions which enable PCI security compliance. Partially
offsetting this increase was a decline in sales for a legacy
check processing solution.
System Solutions net revenues increased $87.4 million, or
20%, to $517.2 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, from $429.7 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2005. System Solutions net revenues
comprised 89% of total net revenues for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, which was essentially unchanged from the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2005.
International System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006 increased $47.4 million, or
25%, to $237.5 million, from $190.1 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2005. The increase was
largely attributable to growth in emerging economies in Latin
America, Gulf States, and Eastern Europe, and to a lesser degree
Western Europe. Revenues in Asia Pacific declined slightly,
partially due to higher sales for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005 because of a Malaysian EMV deadline, as
well as competitive pressures affecting our China business for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. Factors driving the
overall international increase included the desire of emerging
market countries to improve collection of VAT, broadening
customer acceptance of our Vx Solutions, including our second
generation wireless solutions, and the need for customers to
comply with EMV requirements.
North America System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006 increased $40.0 million, or
17%, to $279.7 million, from $239.7 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2005. This increase was
primarily attributable to the ongoing replacement of the
installed base with System Solutions that have IP communication
and PIN-based debit capabilities. Other factors included greater
demand for solutions which address the lower priced single
application financial system market and strength in Canada. We
also experienced increased sales of our legacy check processing
solution, but these increases were offset by a decline in our
quick service restaurant business, as a number of key corporate
rollouts were largely complete by October 31, 2005.
Services
Services net revenues increased $46.7 million, or 73%, to
$110.6 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007 from $63.9 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006. This growth occurred primarily in
International and to a lesser degree in North America.
International growth was due to higher maintenance revenues and
deployment revenues in Europe and Brazil associated with the
acquisition of Lipman. In North America, the growth of services
was primarily due to a significant field upgrade project for a
petroleum customer.
41
Services net revenues increased $8.3 million, or 15%, to
$63.9 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2006 from $55.6 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005. This growth occurred primarily in
International and to a lesser degree in North America.
International growth was driven by increased demand for repair
and installation services in Latin America and software
application services provided to a large European petroleum
customer. In North America, the growth of services provided to
petroleum and multilane retail customers was partially offset by
a decline in services provided to quick service restaurant
customers.
Gross
Profit
The following table shows the gross profit for System Solutions
and Services (in thousands, except percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Gross Profit Percentage
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
System Solutions
|
|
$
|
246,294
|
|
|
$
|
230,106
|
|
|
$
|
170,330
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
%
|
|
|
44.5
|
%
|
|
|
39.6
|
%
|
Services
|
|
|
52,938
|
|
|
|
31,439
|
|
|
|
26,495
|
|
|
|
47.9
|
%
|
|
|
49.2
|
%
|
|
|
47.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
299,232
|
|
|
$
|
261,545
|
|
|
$
|
196,825
|
|
|
|
33.1
|
%
|
|
|
45.0
|
%
|
|
|
40.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System
Solutions
Gross profit on System Solutions increased $16.2 million,
or 7%, to $246.3 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, from $230.1 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006. Gross profit on System
Solutions represented 31.1% of System Solutions net revenues for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, down from 44.5% for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. This gross profit
percentage decline reflects higher corporate costs, largely
attributable to the acquisition of Lipman. In addition, declines
in gross profit percentage occurred in International and North
America. Gross profit percentage also declined due to the higher
proportion of international net revenues, which typically carry
a lower margin than North American net revenues.
International gross profit percentage declined due to the higher
proportion of sales, following the Lipman acquisition, in China
and Brazil where price competition is significant, as well as
increasing price competition in Turkey and Mexico. We also
discounted non-PCI compliant solutions in order to reduce
inventory levels. In addition, as a result of our acquisition of
Lipman, international sales increased as a proportion of total
sales. As international sales typically carry lower gross profit
percentages relative to domestic gross margins, this resulted in
an adverse impact on total gross margin.
North America gross profit percentage declined primarily due to
the lower proportion of Petroleum system solution sales, which
carry higher than average gross margins, and the growth in
retail system solutions, which carry lower than average margins.
Year end discounting for non-PCI compliant inventory had a
slight unfavorable impact in North America. Wireless solutions,
which increased year over year and carry above average margins,
partially offset these declines.
Corporate costs increased to 11.5% of System Solutions net
revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007
compared to 2.6% of System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006. Corporate costs increased as a
percentage of System Solutions net revenues, in part due to
higher non-cash acquisition related charges including an
increase of $32.3 million of amortization of purchased core
and developed technology assets, $13.9 million of
amortization of
step-up in
inventory and $2.7 million of amortization of step-down in
deferred revenue. In addition, stock-based compensation
increased by $2.1 million. The fiscal year 2007 Corporate
costs also included $15.3 million in charges related to
write-offs of inventory, scrap, and accrual of liabilities to
purchase excess components from contract manufacturers. The
similar costs in fiscal year 2006 were approximately
$4.2 million. Slightly under half of these charges in
fiscal year 2007 related to non-PCI compliant inventory as the
December 31, 2007 PCI deadline significantly reduced the
markets in which non-PCI compliant inventory and components
could be sold. Corporate costs are comprised of non-cash
acquisition charges, including amortization of purchased core
and developed technology assets,
step-up of
inventory and step-down in deferred revenue, and
42
other Corporate charges, including inventory obsolescence and
scrap at corporate distribution centers, rework, specific
warranty provisions, non-standard freight,
over-and-under
absorption of materials management, and supply chain engineering
overhead. Since these costs are generally incurred on a
company-wide basis, it is impractical to allocate them to either
the North America or International segments.
Gross profit on System Solutions, including amortization of
purchased core and developed technology assets, increased
$59.8 million, or 35%, to $230.1 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, from
$170.3 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2005. Gross profit on System Solutions represented 44.5% of
System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, up from 39.6% for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005. Amortization of purchased core and
developed technology assets was 1.1% of System Solutions net
revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006,
compared to 1.6% for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2005, as several purchased core and developed technology assets
became fully amortized and System Solutions revenues grew. Gross
profit percentage improved due to reduction in certain Corporate
costs and improved gross profit percentage in International and
North America segments.
Services
Gross profit on Services increased $21.5 million, or 68%,
to $52.9 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007, from $31.4 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006. Gross profit on Services represented
47.9% of Services net revenues for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, as compared to 49.2% for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006. This decline was due to the higher
proportion of international services revenues, which carry lower
margins relative to North America.
Gross profit on Services increased $4.9 million, or 19%, to
$31.4 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2006, from $26.5 million in the same period of fiscal year
2005. Gross profit represented 49.2% of Services net revenues
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, as compared to
47.6% for the same periods in fiscal year 2005. This improvement
was due to a favorable shift in mix towards helpdesk and on site
maintenance service to petroleum customers and away from
deployment services to QSR customers in addition to
international operational improvements.
Research
and Development Expenses
Research and development, or R&D, expenses for the fiscal
years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 are summarized
in the following table (in thousands, except percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
Change in Dollars
|
|
Change in Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Research and development
|
|
$
|
65,430
|
|
|
$
|
47,353
|
|
|
$
|
41,830
|
|
|
$
|
18,077
|
|
|
$
|
5,523
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
%
|
|
|
13.2
|
%
|
Percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
7.2
|
%
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
8.6
|
%
|
|
|
5.6
|
%
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R&D expenses for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007 increased compared to the same period ended
October 31, 2006, due to $13.6 million of expenses
incurred at former Lipman entities, $4.7 million of
stock-based compensation, and $2.5 million of expenses
incurred at former PayWare entities, all partially offset by
$4.8 million of higher software costs required to be
capitalized under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 86 for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 as compared to the prior fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006 due to an increase in the number of
projects which have software spending.
R&D expenses for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2006 increased compared to the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005, primarily due to $5.4 million of
increased expenses to develop Vx 670
pay-at-the-table,
Vx 570 countertop, Mx870
multi-lane
retail and other worldwide initiatives as well as
$0.9 million of expenses from the inclusion of a full year
of GO Software. GO Software was acquired on March 1, 2005.
Partially offsetting this was $1.6 million of lower
expenses for petroleum applications, and $0.3 million of
decreased international expenses due to the non-recurrence of
certification expenses to support the 2005 introduction of the
Vx platform and wireless products. In addition,
$0.8 million of increased expenses was due to stock-based
compensation for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006.
43
Sales
and Marketing Expenses
Sales and marketing expenses for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 are summarized in the
following table (in thousands, except percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
Change in Dollars
|
|
Change in Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
$
|
96,295
|
|
|
$
|
58,607
|
|
|
$
|
52,231
|
|
|
$
|
37,688
|
|
|
$
|
6,376
|
|
|
|
64.3
|
%
|
|
|
12.2
|
%
|
Percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
10.7
|
%
|
|
|
10.1
|
%
|
|
|
10.8
|
%
|
|
|
11.7
|
%
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing expenses for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 increased compared to the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006. The higher expenses, due primarily
to the acquisitions of Lipman and PayWare, included
$15.7 million of increased personnel costs,
$6.9 million of increased stock-based compensation,
$6.0 million of increased outside services,
$2.5 million of increased marketing communication expenses,
and $2.2 million of increased travel expenses.
Sales and marketing expenses for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006 increased compared to the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2005, due to $2.3 million of
increased International expenses, primarily in Europe to support
sales growth, a $1.6 million increase in corporate sales
incentive programs and promotional expenses pertaining to the
MX870 and Visual Payments launch, Vx product family and wireless
initiatives and acquisition integration expenses, and
$0.7 million of increased expenses from the inclusion of GO
Software. An additional $1.4 million of increased expenses
was due to stock-based compensation for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 are summarized in the
following table (in thousands, except percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
Change in Dollars
|
|
Change in Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
$
|
80,704
|
|
|
$
|
42,573
|
|
|
$
|
29,609
|
|
|
$
|
38,131
|
|
|
$
|
12,964
|
|
|
|
89.6
|
%
|
|
|
43.8
|
%
|
Percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
8.9
|
%
|
|
|
7.3
|
%
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
11.8
|
%
|
|
|
13.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 increased compared to the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006, due to the acquisitions of Lipman
and PayWare and included $10.2 million of integration
expenses relating to the acquisition of Lipman and restructuring
charges in VeriFone entities, $9.0 million of increased
stock-based compensation, $8.4 million of increased
personnel costs, $2.7 million of increased outside
contracted services, $2.0 million of increased bad debt
expense, $1.0 million of increased legal expenses, and
$0.9 million of increased insurance expenses.
General and administrative expenses for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006 increased compared to the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2005, due to a $4.7 million increase
in expenses related to the requirements of operating as a public
company, including $2.7 million associated with
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, a
$1.6 million one-time credit for the favorable resolution
of the payroll tax contingency recorded in 2005, a net
$1.6 million increase in bad debt expenses primarily due to
the non-recurrence of fiscal year 2005 credits associated with
the collection of specifically reserved accounts receivables, a
$1.5 million increase in executive bonuses, a
$1.0 million increase in expenses related to planning costs
in connection with the acquisition of Lipman and implementation
of Enterprise Resource Planning system upgrade. In addition,
$1.6 million of increased expenses was due to stock-based
compensation for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006.
44
Amortization
of Purchased Intangible Assets
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, amortization of
purchased intangible assets increased $16.9 million, to
$21.6 million from $4.7 million for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006. The increase was primarily due to
additional purchased intangible assets relating to the
acquisition of Lipman, which was completed on November 1,
2006.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, amortization of
purchased intangible assets decreased $0.3 million, to
$4.7 million from $5.0 million for the comparable
period in fiscal year 2005. The decrease was due to several
purchased intangible assets having been fully amortized during
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005, offset in part by
the full year amortization of intangible assets relating to the
acquisition of GO Software, which was completed on March 1,
2005.
In-Process
Research and Development (IPR&D)
We recognized IPR&D expense of $6.8 million during the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 in connection with our
Lipman acquisition. The products considered to be IPR&D
were in our consumer-activated and countertop communication
modules which have subsequently reached technological
feasibility.
Consumer-activated systems. We had two
projects involving consumer-activated systems in process. The
first involved a new category of PIN pad devices with debit,
credit, and smart card payment capabilities with interfaces to
countertop systems and ECRs. The project was 75% complete at
November 1, 2006. The estimated cost of completion at
November 1, 2006 was $0.3 million and the expected
completion date was December 2006. The project was completed
during the three months ended January 31, 2007 for
approximately the estimated cost.
The second project was a new product family of
consumer-activated payment systems for
multi-lane
retailers. New features include a faster processor, more memory,
modular design, a signature capture option, Ethernet/USB option,
and smart card option. The project was in the pilot stage. The
estimated cost of completion at November 1, 2006 was less
than $0.1 million. The project was completed during the
three months ended January 31, 2007 for approximately the
estimated cost.
Countertop communication modules. This project
was developing new modem, Ethernet, and ISDN communication
modules for countertop system solutions, consisting of customer
firmware and circuit board design intended to achieve desired
functions, operating system drivers, library, and application
modifications. The project was 50% complete at November 1,
2006. The estimated cost of completion at the acquisition date
was $0.2 million and the expected completion date was
December 2006. The project was completed during the quarter
ended January 31, 2007 for approximately the estimated cost.
We prepared cash flow forecasts for the acquired projects and
those forecasts were used to develop a discounted cash flow
model. The discount rate assigned to in-process technologies was
19% with consideration given to the risk associated with these
in-process projects.
Interest
Expense
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, interest
expense increased $23.0 million to $36.6 million, from
$13.6 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2006. The increase for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007 was primarily attributable to the principal amount of debt
outstanding due to the completion of our acquisition of Lipman,
partially offset by the lower average interest rates paid
following issuance of our convertible debt. We will pay 1.375%
interest per annum on the principal amount of the convertible
debt, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and
December 15 of each year, commencing on December 15, 2007.
As a result of the restatement, and our inability from December
2007 to register the notes and the underlying shares with the
SEC, we have been subject since December 20, 2007 to
additional interest on the convertible debt of 0.25% per annum,
which increased to 0.50% per annum on March 19, 2008
relating to our registration obligations relating to the notes
and underlying common shares. Because we did not increase our
authorized capital to permit conversion of all of the notes at
the initial conversion rate, since June 21, 2008 we also
have been subject to additional interest of 2.0% per annum on
the principal amount of the notes, which will increase by 0.25%
per annum on each anniversary thereafter if the authorized
capital has not been increased. In addition, the interest rate
on the notes increased an additional 0.25%
45
per annum on May 1, 2008 (in addition to the additional
interest described above), because we failed to timely file and
deliver this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
In addition, on April 28, 2008, we entered into a Second
Amendment to the Credit Agreement (the Second
Amendment) with the Lenders under our Credit Facility. In
connection with the Second Amendment, we agreed to an increase
in the interest rate payable on the term loan and any revolving
commitments of 0.75% per annum. On July 31, 2008, we
entered into a Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement (the
Third Amendment) with the Lenders under the Credit
Facility. The Third Amendment extends the time periods for
delivery of certain required financial information for the
three-month periods ended January 31, April 30 and
July 31, 2007, the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007
and the three-month periods ended January 31 and April 30,
2008 to August 31, 2008. There are no changes to interest
rates with the Third Amendment.
The fiscal year 2007 increase in interest expense also includes
3.1 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$1.5 million) of interest recorded in fiscal 2007 related
to interest on various assessments imposed on our Brazilian
subsidiary for the items disclosed in Note 11. There was no
such interest expense in fiscal 2006.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, interest
expense decreased $1.8 million to $13.6 million, from
$15.4 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2005. The decrease for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2006 was attributable to the repayment of our Second Lien Loan
in May 2005 with the proceeds that we received from our initial
public offering.
In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FSP APB
14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement). FSP APB
14-1
requires the issuer of convertible debt instruments with cash
settlement features to account separately for the liability and
equity components of the instrument. The debt would be
recognized at the present value of its cash flows discounted
using the issuers nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at
the time of issuance. The equity component would be recognized
as the difference between the proceeds from the issuance of the
note and the fair value of the liability. The FSP also requires
accretion of the resultant debt discount over the expected life
of the debt. The FSP is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those
years. Entities are required to apply the FSP retrospectively
for all periods presented. We are currently evaluating
FSP APB
14-1 and
have not yet determined the impact its adoption will have on our
consolidated financial statements. However, the impact of this
new accounting treatment will be significant and will result in
a significant increase to non-cash interest expense beginning in
fiscal year 2010 for financial statements covering past and
future periods.
Interest
Income
Interest income of $6.7 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 increased from $3.4 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. The increase was
attributable to higher cash balances for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 relative to the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006.
Interest income of $3.4 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006 increased from $0.6 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2005. The increase was
attributable to our investment of a portion of the proceeds that
we received from our secondary offering which closed in
September 2005.
Other
Expense, net
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, other expense,
net was $7.9 million resulting primarily from the write-off
of debt issuance costs of $4.8 million related to the
accelerated pay-down of the Term B loan facility, and
$2.3 million resulting from the net effects of currency
conversion transactions, currency translation, and settlements
of currency derivative transactions. For the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, other expense, net was $6.4 million
resulting primarily from a $6.4 million loss on early debt
extinguishment associated with our existing Credit Facility.
Provision
for Income Taxes
We recorded a provision for income taxes of $24.7 million
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 compared to a
provision for income taxes of $32.2 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006. The decrease in the
46
provision for income taxes is primarily attributable to a
decrease in global pre-tax income and changes in the
jurisdictional mix of income, partially offset by increases in
valuation allowance during the year.
Our effective tax rate was (266%) for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 as compared to 35% for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006. The effective tax rate was
different than the expected statutory rate of 35% for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007 due to the decrease in global
pre-tax income and changes in the jurisdictional mix of income,
partially offset by increases in the valuation allowance during
the year ended October 31, 2007.
We recorded a provision for income taxes of $32.2 million
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, compared to
$13.5 million in fiscal year 2005. The increase in the
provision for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 from
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005 is primarily
attributable to an increase in our pre-tax income and
secondarily to an increase in our effective tax rate. For the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, our effective tax rate
was 35.1% as compared to 28.9% for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005. The increase in the tax rate is primarily
attributable to the net effect of increases in pre-tax income, a
smaller reduction in our valuation allowance for deferred tax
assets, expiration of the federal research credit offset by
increases in the amount of income considered permanently
reinvested in foreign operations and subject to lower foreign
tax rates.
As of October 31, 2007, we have recorded deferred tax
assets on our consolidated balance sheet after recording a
valuation allowance against foreign tax credits carryforwards,
foreign taxes on basis differences and certain tax deductible
intangible assets reversing beyond 2010 and various
non-U.S. net
operating losses. The realization of these assets is dependent
on our generating sufficient U.S. and foreign taxable
income. The amount of deferred tax assets considered realizable
may increase or decrease in subsequent quarters when we
reevaluate the underlying basis for our estimates of future
domestic and certain foreign taxable income.
We are currently under audit by the Internal Revenue Service, or
IRS, for our fiscal years 2003 and 2004. Although we believe we
have correctly provided appropriate amounts for income taxes
payable for the years subject to audit, the IRS may adopt
different interpretations. We have not yet received any final
determinations with respect to this audit.
We are currently under audit by the Israeli Tax Authority, or
ITA, for our fiscal years 2004 through 2006 and the Brazil tax
authority for calendar tax years 2003 through 2008. Although we
believe we have correctly provided appropriate amounts for
income taxes payable for the years subject to audit, the ITA may
adopt different interpretations. We have not yet received any
final determinations with respect to these audits.
Segment
Information
Corporate net revenues and operating income (loss) reflect
non-cash acquisition charges, including amortization of
purchased core and developed technology assets,
step-up of
inventory and step-down in deferred revenue, and other Corporate
charges, including inventory obsolescence and scrap at corporate
distribution centers, rework, specific warrant provisions,
non-standard freight,
over-and-under
absorption of materials management, and supply chain engineering
overhead.
47
The following table reconciles segmented net revenues and
operating income to totals for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
Change in Dollars
|
|
|
Change in Percent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
2007 vs
|
|
|
2006 vs
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
400,433
|
|
|
$
|
333,673
|
|
|
$
|
289,720
|
|
|
$
|
66,760
|
|
|
$
|
43,953
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
%
|
|
|
15.2
|
%
|
International
|
|
|
506,195
|
|
|
|
248,383
|
|
|
|
196,347
|
|
|
|
257,812
|
|
|
|
52,036
|
|
|
|
103.8
|
%
|
|
|
26.5
|
%
|
Corporate
|
|
|
(3,736
|
)
|
|
|
(986
|
)
|
|
|
(700
|
)
|
|
|
(2,750
|
)
|
|
|
(286
|
)
|
|
|
278.9
|
%
|
|
|
40.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
$
|
902,892
|
|
|
$
|
581,070
|
|
|
$
|
485,367
|
|
|
$
|
321,822
|
|
|
$
|
95,703
|
|
|
|
55.4
|
%
|
|
|
19.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
156,562
|
|
|
$
|
129,358
|
|
|
$
|
104,867
|
|
|
$
|
27,204
|
|
|
$
|
24,491
|
|
|
|
21.0
|
%
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
International
|
|
|
110,795
|
|
|
|
60,965
|
|
|
|
37,375
|
|
|
|
49,830
|
|
|
|
23,590
|
|
|
|
81.7
|
%
|
|
|
63.1
|
%
|
Corporate
|
|
|
(238,877
|
)
|
|
|
(82,014
|
)
|
|
|
(74,054
|
)
|
|
|
(156,863
|
)
|
|
|
(7,960
|
)
|
|
|
191.3
|
%
|
|
|
10.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income
|
|
$
|
28,480
|
|
|
$
|
108,309
|
|
|
$
|
68,188
|
|
|
$
|
(79,829
|
)
|
|
$
|
40,121
|
|
|
|
(73.7
|
)%
|
|
|
58.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues growth in International for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 as compared to the prior year was
primarily driven by an increase of approximately
$213.1 million in System Solutions and $44.8 million
in Services net revenues following the Lipman acquisition. See
Results of Operations Net Revenues for
additional commentary.
Net revenues growth in North America for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 as compared to the prior year was
primarily driven by an increase of approximately
$61.5 million in System Solutions and $5.2 million in
Services net revenues following the Lipman acquisition. See
Results of Operations Net Revenues for
additional commentary.
The increase in International operating income for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007 compared to the prior year was
due to higher revenue as a result of both the acquisition of
Lipman and organic growth, partially offset by a declining gross
profit percentage and higher operating expenses. See
Results of Operations Gross Profit for
additional commentary.
The increase in operating income for North America for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 was due to higher
revenue, and gross profit, partially offset by a declining gross
profit percentage. See Results of Operations
Gross Profit for additional commentary. In addition, North
America research and development expenses for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2006 included $8.5 million for
projects which have since been broadened in scope and will
benefit customers outside the North America segment. As a
result, the expenses for these projects for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007 are charged to Corporate.
The decrease in Corporate operating income for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007 was primarily due to higher non-cash
acquisition related charges including an increase of
$32.3 million of amortization of purchased core and
developed technology assets, $16.9 million of amortization
of purchased intangible assets, $13.8 million of
amortization of
step-up in
inventory on acquisition, $6.8 million of in-process
research and development charges, and $2.7 million of
amortization of step-down in deferred revenue on acquisition. In
addition, stock-based compensation increased by
$22.9 million. Furthermore, in fiscal year 2007, Corporate
costs included $15.3 million in charges related to
write-offs of inventory, scrap, and accrual of liabilities to
purchase excess components from contract manufacturers, compared
to $4.2 million for fiscal year ended October 31,
2006. Slightly under half of 2007 charges related to non-PCI
compliant inventory as the December 31, 2007 PCI deadline
significantly reduced the markets in which non-PCI compliant
inventory and components could be sold. Also, product warranty
cost increased $3.7 million primarily due to product
situation reserve for the acquired product. In addition,
approximately $8.5 million of engineering expenses for
projects which previously benefited North America in the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006 were broadened in scope,
managed by the Corporate engineering function and charged
48
to Corporate in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007.
Furthermore, Corporate operating expenses increased
$36.9 million primarily due to the acquisitions of Lipman
and PayWare and the related integration expenses.
The increase in International operating income for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006 compared to the prior year was
mainly due to increased net revenues and a higher gross profit
percentage as a result of the introduction of higher margin Vx
wireless solutions and favorable product mix, partially offset
by higher operating expenses.
The increase in operating income for North America for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 compared to the prior
year was mainly due to higher net revenues and a higher gross
profit percentage as a result of favorable product mix in both
System Solutions and to a lesser extent Services, which was
partially offset by higher operating expenses.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
89,270
|
|
|
$
|
16,747
|
|
|
$
|
40,159
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(311,696
|
)
|
|
|
(4,025
|
)
|
|
|
(35,004
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
349,920
|
|
|
|
7,834
|
|
|
|
47,319
|
|
Effect of foreign currency exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
128,437
|
|
|
$
|
21,499
|
|
|
$
|
52,360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our primary liquidity and capital resource needs are to service
our debt, finance working capital, and to make capital
expenditures and investments. At October 31, 2007, our
primary sources of liquidity were cash and cash equivalents of
$215 million and our $40 million unused revolving
credit facility.
Operating
Activities
Cash flow from operations before changes in working capital
amounted to $76.7 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007. A net loss of $34.0 million was
offset by non-cash charges of $110.8 million, consisting
primarily of acquisition-related charges of $66.2 million;
stock-based compensation expense of $28.9 million;
depreciation and amortization related to property, plant, and
equipment, capitalized software, and debt issuance costs
totaling $10.7 million; and the non-cash portion of the
loss on debt extinguishment totaling $4.8 million.
Cash flow from operations due to changes in working capital
netted to $12.5 million during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007. The main drivers are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
A reduction in inventory of $45.1 million. This reduction
occurred primarily because the beginning balance of inventory
for the period was unusually high because we had increased
inventory for our initial stocking of inventory for new product
releases. In addition, we balanced our inventory position to
meet the demand changes triggered by the acquisition of Lipman;
|
|
|
|
An increase in accounts payable of $28.1 million due to
timing of purchases of inventory and services;
|
|
|
|
An increase in deferred revenue of $14.5 million due to an
increased in deferred service such as customer support and
installations;
|
|
|
|
An increase in tax-related balances totaling $18.1 million,
which included increases in deferred tax liabilities of
$38.3 million and income taxes payable of
$20.4 million, partially offset by an increase in deferred
tax assets of $29.1 million and the reclassification of tax
benefits from stock-based compensation of $11.5 million;
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
An increase in accounts receivable of $39.5 million due to
higher sales and sales orders being received more towards the
end of our fiscal year; and
|
|
|
|
Increases in prepaid expenses and other current assets of
$41.5 million and in other assets of $5.1 million.
|
Our operations provided cash of $16.7 million for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, which was attributable
to net income of $59.5 million and depreciation,
amortization and other non-cash charges of $28.7 million,
offset by $71.5 million used by net operating assets and
liabilities. The principal uses of net operating assets and
liabilities for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 were
largely attributable to an increase in inventories of
$52.0 million, an increase in accounts receivable of
$28.9 million, an increase in deferred tax assets of
$5.8 million, an increase in prepaid expenses and other
current assets of $4.4 million, an increase in other assets
of $2.1 million, tax benefit from stock-based compensation
of $3.4 million, a decrease in accrued warranty of
$1.3 million, and a decrease in accrued expenses and other
liabilities of $2.1 million. The beginning inventory
balance for the previous year, as measured by inventory turns,
was at an unusually low balance due to a number of factors
including higher than expected demand and transitional issues
with two contract manufacturers. In addition, we increased
inventory as a result of balancing our inventory position to
meet the demand changes triggered by the acquisition of Lipman.
The accounts receivable increase was primarily driven by higher
sales in addition to a shift towards International, which
typically carries a higher days sales outstanding (DSO). This
was partially offset by an increase in accounts payable of
$17.2 million resulting from higher inventory levels, an
increase in income tax payable of $1.5 million, an increase
in accrued compensation of $2.7 million, and an increase in
deferred revenue, net of $7.2 million.
Investing
Activities
Investing activities used cash of $311.7 million during the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. The acquisition of
Lipman used cash of $263.6 million, net of cash and cash
equivalents acquired. We also acquired a majority interest in
VeriFone Transportation Systems (VTS) for cash of
$4.1 million, net of cash and cash equivalents acquired. In
addition, we made equity investments in two companies totaling
$5.7 million. Purchases of property, plant, and equipment
totaled $30.2 million, including an increase in
construction in progress of $17.6 million primarily related
to our migrating to a new enterprise resource planning
information system, which will replace our existing system. In
addition, the capitalization of software development costs was
$7.7 million.
Our investing activities used $4.0 million of net cash
during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. Cash
generated by the sale of marketable securities was
$141.9 million, partially offset by investments in
marketable securities of $125.0 million, capitalization of
software development of $2.0 million, purchases of other
assets of $0.9 million, purchases of property, plant, and
equipment of $3.7 million, transaction costs for pending
acquisitions of $3.4 million, and acquisition of PayWare,
net of cash and cash of equivalent of $10.9 million.
Financing
Activities
Financing activities provided cash of $350.0 million for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. In November 2006,
we drew $305.3 million, net of costs, on our Term B loan to
fund our acquisition of Lipman. In June 2007, we issued
1.375% Senior Convertible Notes (the Senior
Notes) for net proceeds of $307.9 million. We used
$260.0 million of the proceeds from the Senior Notes to pay
down our Term B loan in addition to other payments totaling
$3.8 million against our Term B loan and other debt. In
other transactions related to the Senior Notes, we used
$80.2 million to purchase a hedge on the Senior Notes and
received $31.2 million from the sale of warrants. We
received additional proceeds of $37.1 million from the
exercise of stock options and $11.5 million from the tax
benefit derived from stock-based compensation.
Our financing provided cash of $7.8 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006, primarily due to tax benefits
related to exercise of stock options of $3.4 million,
proceeds from long-term debt $184.0 million and proceeds
from stock options exercises of $3.0 million, partially
offset by principal payments of $182.6 million on the Term
B loan and repayment of $0.1 million of capital leases.
Our future capital requirements may vary significantly from
prior periods as well as from those currently planned. These
requirements will depend on a number of factors, including
operating factors such as our terms and
50
payment experience with customers and investment we may make in
product or market development such as our current investments in
expanding our International operations. Finally, our capital
needs may be significantly affected by any acquisition we may
make in the future. Based upon our current level of operations,
we believe that we have the financial resources to meet our
business requirements for the next year, including capital
expenditures, working capital requirements, and future strategic
investments, and to comply with our financial covenants.
Secured
Credit Facility
On June 30, 2004, we entered into a secured credit facility
(the Old Credit Facility) with a syndicate of
financial institutions. The Old Credit Facility consisted of a
Revolver permitting borrowings up to $30 million, a Term B
Loan of $190 million, and a Second Lien Loan of
$72 million.
On October 31, 2006, our principal subsidiary, VeriFone,
Inc. (the Borrower), entered into a credit agreement
consisting of a Term B Loan facility of $500 million and a
revolving credit facility permitting borrowings of up to
$40 million. The proceeds from the Term B loan were used to
repay all outstanding amounts relating to the Old Credit
Facility, pay certain transaction costs and partially fund the
cash consideration in connection with the acquisition of Lipman
on November 1, 2006. Through October 31, 2007, the
Company had repaid an aggregate of $263.8 million, leaving
a Term B Loan balance of $236.2 million at October 31,
2007.
The Credit Facility is guaranteed by VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and
certain of its subsidiaries and is secured by collateral
including substantially all of our assets and stock of our
subsidiaries. Prior to the January 25, 2008 amendment
discussed below, at October 31, 2007 and October 31,
2006, the interest rates were 7.11% and 7.12% on the Term B Loan
and 6.61% and 6.87% on the revolving loan, respectively. We pay
a commitment fee on the unused portion of the revolving loan
under the Credit Facility at a rate that varies between 0.375%
and 0.300% per annum depending upon its consolidated total
leverage ratio. As of October 31, 2007 and 2006, the
commitment fee was 0.300% and 0.375% per annum, respectively. We
pay a letter of credit fee on the unused portion of any letter
of credit issued under the Credit Facility at a rate that varies
between 1.50% and 1.25% per annum depending upon our
consolidated total leverage ratio. At October 31, 2007 and
October 31, 2006, we were subject to a letter of credit fee
at a rate of 1.25% and 1.50% per annum, respectively.
As of October 31, 2007, at our option, the revolving loan
bears interest at a rate of 1.25% over the three-month LIBOR,
which was 5.36%, or 0.25% over the lenders base rate,
which was 7.50%. As of October 31, 2006, at our option, the
revolving loan bore interest at a rate of 1.50% over the
three-month LIBOR, which was 5.37%, or 0.50% over the
lenders base rate, which was 8.25%. As of October 31,
2007, the entire $40 million revolving loan was available
for borrowing to meet short-term working capital requirements.
At our option, at October 31, 2007 and 2006, the Term B
Loan bore interest at a rate of 1.75% over the three-month LIBOR
or 0.75% over the lenders base rate.
Interest payments are generally paid quarterly but can be based
on one, two, three, or six-month periods. The lenders base
rate is the greater of the Federal Funds rate plus 50 basis
points or the JPMorgan prime rate. The respective maturity dates
on the components of the Credit Facility are October 31,
2012 for the revolving loan and October 31, 2013 for the
Term B Loan. Payments on the Term B Loan are due in equal
quarterly installments of $1.2 million over the seven-year
term on the last business day of each calendar quarter with the
balance due on maturity.
The terms of the Credit Facility require us to comply with
financial covenants, including maintaining leverage and fixed
charge coverage ratios at the end of each fiscal quarter,
obtaining protection against fluctuation in interest rates, and
limits on annual capital expenditure levels. As of
October 31, 2007, we were required to maintain a total
leverage ratio of not greater than 4.0 to 1.0 and a fixed charge
coverage ratio of at least 2.0 to 1.0. Total leverage ratio is
equal to total debt less cash as of the end of a reporting
fiscal quarter divided by the consolidated EBITDA for the most
recent four consecutive fiscal quarters. Some of the financial
covenants become more restrictive over the term of the Credit
Facility. Noncompliance with any of the financial covenants
without cure or waiver would constitute an event of default
under the Credit Facility. An event of default resulting from a
breach of a financial covenant may result, at the option of
lenders holding a majority of the loans, in an acceleration of
repayment of the principal and interest outstanding and a
termination of the revolving loan. The Credit Facility also
contains non-financial covenants that restrict some of our
activities, including our ability to dispose of assets, incur
additional debt, pay
51
dividends, create liens, make investments, make capital
expenditures, and engage in specified transactions with
affiliates. The terms of the Credit Facility permit prepayments
of principal and require prepayments of principal upon the
occurrence of certain events including among others, the receipt
of proceeds from the sale of assets, the receipt of excess cash
flow as defined, and the receipt of proceeds of certain debt
issues. The Credit Facility also contains customary events of
default, including defaults based on events of bankruptcy and
insolvency, nonpayment of principal, interest, or fees when due,
subject to specified grace periods, breach of specified
covenants, change in control, and material inaccuracy of
representations and warranties. We were in compliance with our
financial and non-financial covenants as of October 31,
2007.
On January 25, 2008, the Borrower and VeriFone Intermediate
Holdings, Inc. entered into a First Amendment to the Credit
Agreement and Waiver (the First Amendment) with the
Lenders under its Credit Facility, dated October 31, 2006.
The First Amendment extends the deadlines for delivery of
certain required financial information for the three-month
periods ended January 31, April 30, and July 31, 2007,
the year ended October 31, 2007 and the three-month period
ended January 31, 2008. In connection with the First
Amendment, the Borrower paid to consenting Lenders a fee of
$0.7 million, or 0.25% of the aggregate amount outstanding
under the Term B loan and revolving credit commitment made
available by the consenting Lenders, and agreed to an increase
in the interest rate payable on the term loan of 0.25% per annum.
On April 28, 2008, the Borrower and VeriFone Intermediate
Holdings, Inc. entered into a Second Amendment to the Credit
Agreement (the Second Amendment) with the Lenders
under its Credit Facility. The Second Amendment extends the time
periods for delivery of certain required financial information
for the three-month periods ended January 31, April 30, and
July 31, 2007, the year ended October 31, 2007, and
the three-month periods ended January 31 and April 30, 2008
to July 31, 2008. In connection with the Second Amendment,
the Borrower paid to consenting Lenders a fee of
$0.7 million, or 0.25% of the aggregate amount outstanding
under the term loan and revolving credit commitment made
available by the consenting Lenders, agreed to an additional
increase in the interest rate payable on the Term B loan and any
revolving commitments of 0.75% per annum, agreed to an increase
of 0.125% per annum to the commitment fee for unused revolving
commitments, and agreed to an increase of 0.75% per annum to the
letter of credit fees, each of which are effective from the date
of the Second Amendment.
On July 31, 2008, the Borrower and VeriFone Intermediate
Holdings, Inc. entered into a Third Amendment to the Credit
Agreement (the Third Amendment) with the Lenders
under its Credit Facility. The Third Amendment extends the time
periods for delivery of certain required financial information
for the three-month periods ended January 31, April 30 and
July 31, 2007, the year ended October 31, 2007 and the
three-month periods ended January 31 and April 30, 2008 to
August 31, 2008. In connection with the Third Amendment,
the Borrower paid to consenting Lenders a fee of
$0.3 million, or 0.125% of the aggregate amount outstanding
under the Term B loan and the amount of the revolving credit
commitment made available by the consenting Lenders. Following
the Third Amendment, the Borrower pays interest on the Term B
loan at a rate of 2.75% over three-month LIBOR (the Borrower may
elect at the end of an interest period to have the term loan
bear interest at 1.75% over the lenders base rate) and any
revolving loans would bear interest, at the Borrowers
option, at either 2.0% over LIBOR or 1.0% over the lenders
base rate, assuming the Borrower remains in the lowest rate tier
based on its total consolidated leverage ratio.
In each of the Credit Agreement amendments, the Lenders agreed
that no default that may have arisen under the Credit Agreement
by virtue of any failure to deliver accurate financial
statements or the related certifications for the fiscal quarters
being restated would be a Default or an Event of Default as
defined under the Credit Agreement. The Lenders also agreed that
any such Default or Event of Default would for all purposes of
the Credit Agreement and related loan documents be waived.
1.375% Senior
Convertible Notes
On June 22, 2007, we sold $316.2 million aggregate
principal amount of 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes due
2012 (the Notes) in an offering through Lehman
Brothers Inc. and JP Morgan Securities Inc. (together,
initial purchasers) to qualified institutional
buyers pursuant to Section 4(2) and Rule 144A under
the Securities Act. The net proceeds from the offering, after
deducting transaction costs, were approximately
$307.9 million. We incurred
52
approximately $8.3 million of debt issuance costs. The
transaction costs, consisting of the initial purchasers
discounts and offering expenses, were primarily recorded in debt
issuance costs, net and are being amortized to interest expense
using the effective interest method over five years. We will pay
1.375% interest per annum on the principal amount of the Notes,
payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and December
15 of each year, commencing on December 15, 2007, subject
to increase in certain circumstances as described below.
The Notes were issued under an Indenture with U.S. Bank
National Association, as trustee. Each $1,000 of principal of
the Notes will initially be convertible into 22.719 shares
of VeriFone common stock, which is equivalent to a conversion
price of approximately $44.02 per share, subject to adjustment
upon the occurrence of specified events. Holders of the Notes
may convert their Notes prior to maturity during specified
periods as follows: (1) on any date during any fiscal
quarter beginning after October 31, 2007 (and only during
such fiscal quarter) if the closing sale price of our common
stock was more than 130% of the then current conversion price
for at least 20 trading days in the period of the 30
consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the
previous fiscal quarter; (2) at any time on or after
March 15, 2012; (3) if we distribute, to all holders
of our common stock, rights or warrants (other than pursuant to
a rights plan) entitling them to purchase, for a period of 45
calendar days or less, shares of our common stock at a price
less than the average closing sale price for the ten trading
days preceding the declaration date for such distribution;
(4) if we distribute, to all holders of our common stock,
cash or other assets, debt securities, or rights to purchase our
securities (other than pursuant to a rights plan), which
distribution has a per share value exceeding 10% of the closing
sale price of our common stock on the trading day preceding the
declaration date for such distribution; (5) during a
specified period if certain types of fundamental changes occur;
or (6) during the five
business-day
period following any five consecutive
trading-day
period in which the trading price for the Notes was less than
98% of the average of the closing sale price of our common stock
for each day during such five
trading-day
period multiplied by the then current conversion rate. Upon
conversion, we would pay the holder the cash value of the
applicable number of shares of our common stock, up to the
principal amount of the note. Amounts in excess of the principal
amount, if any, will be paid in stock. Unless and until we
obtain stockholder approval to amend our certificate of
incorporation to increase our authorized capital, the maximum
number of shares available for issuance upon conversion of each
$1,000 principal amount of Notes will be the pro rata portion of
an aggregate of 3,250,000 shares allocable to such Note,
which equates to 10.2766 shares per $1,000 principal amount
of Notes. We have agreed to use our reasonable best efforts to
seek such stockholder approval within one year of the issuance
of the Notes. Because we did not increase our authorized capital
to permit conversion of all of the Notes at the initial
conversion rate by June 21, 2008, beginning on
June 21, 2008 the Notes began to bear additional interest
at a rate of 2.0% per annum (in addition to the additional
interest described below) on the principal amount of the Notes,
which will increase by 0.25% per annum on each anniversary
thereafter if the authorized capital has not been increased. If
stockholder approval to increase our authorized capital is
received, such additional interest will cease to accrue.
As of October 31, 2007, none of the conditions allowing
holders of the Notes to convert had been met. If a fundamental
change, as defined in the Indenture, occurs prior to the
maturity date, holders of the Notes may require us to repurchase
all or a portion of their Notes for cash at a repurchase price
equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be
repurchased, plus any accrued and unpaid interest (including
additional interest, if any) to, but excluding, the repurchase
date.
The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and rank equal in
right of payment with all of our existing and future senior
unsecured indebtedness. The Notes are effectively subordinated
to any secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the
related collateral and structurally subordinated to indebtedness
and other liabilities of our subsidiaries including any secured
indebtedness of such subsidiaries.
In connection with the sale of the Notes, we entered into a
registration rights agreement, dated as of June 22, 2007,
with the initial purchasers of the Notes (the Registration
Rights Agreement). Under the Registration Rights
Agreement, we agreed (1) to use reasonable best efforts to
cause a shelf registration statement covering resales of the
Notes and the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of
the Notes to be declared effective by December 19, 2007 or
to cause an existing shelf registration statement to be made
available within 180 days after the original issuance of
the Notes and (2) to use our reasonable best efforts to
keep effective the shelf registration statement until the
earliest of (i) the date when the holders of transfer
restricted Notes and shares of common stock issued upon
conversion of the Notes are able to sell all such securities
immediately without restriction under
53
Rule 144(k) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended
(the Securities Act), (ii) the date when all
transfer-restricted Notes and shares of common stock issued upon
conversion of the Notes are registered under the registration
statement and sold pursuant thereto and (iii) the date when
all transfer-restricted Notes and shares of common stock issued
upon conversion of the Notes have ceased to be outstanding. If
we fail to meet these terms, we will be required to pay
additional interest on the Notes at a rate of 0.25% per annum
for the first 90 days and at a rate of 0.50% per annum
thereafter.
Due to the delay in the filing of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
we have not yet been able to register the Notes and the shares
underlying the Notes. Accordingly, the interest rate on the
Notes increased by 0.25% per annum on December 20, 2007 and
by an additional 0.25% per annum on March 19, 2008 relating
to our obligations under the Registration Rights Agreement. Once
a registration statement covering the Notes and shares
underlying the Notes is declared effective, such additional
interest will cease to accrue. The interest penalty on
convertible note derivatives was valued at $0.6 million and
has been accrued as of October 31, 2007.
In addition, the interest rate on the Notes increased an
additional 0.25% per annum on May 1, 2008 (in addition to
the additional interest described above) because we failed to
file and deliver this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Such additional 0.25% interest will cease to accrue upon the
filing of this
Form 10-K.
In connection with the offering of the Notes, we entered into
note hedge transactions with affiliates of the initial
purchasers (the counterparties) whereby we have the
option to purchase up to 7,184,884 shares of our common
stock at a price of approximately $44.02 per share. The cost to
us of the note hedge transactions was approximately
$80.2 million. The note hedge transactions are intended to
mitigate the potential dilution upon conversion of the Notes in
the event that the volume weighted average price of our common
stock on each trading day of the relevant conversion period or
other relevant valuation period is greater than the applicable
strike price of the convertible note hedge transactions, which
initially corresponds to the conversion price of the Notes and
is subject, with certain exceptions, to the adjustments
applicable to the conversion price of the Notes.
In addition, we sold warrants to the counterparties whereby they
have the option to purchase up to approximately 7.2 million
shares of our common stock at a price of $62.356 per share. We
received approximately $31.2 million in cash proceeds from
the sale of these warrants. If the volume weighted average price
of our common stock on each trading day of the measurement
period at maturity of the warrants exceeds the applicable strike
price of the warrants, there would be dilution to the extent
that such volume weighted average price of our common stock
exceeds the applicable strike price of the warrants. Unless and
until we obtain stockholder approval to amend our certificate of
incorporation to increase our authorized capital, the maximum
number of shares issuable upon exercise of the warrants will be
1,000,000 shares of our common stock. If we do not obtain
stockholder approval to amend our certificate of incorporation
to increase our authorized capital by the date of the second
annual meeting of our stockholders after the date of the pricing
of the Notes, the number of shares of our common stock
underlying the warrants will increase by 10%, and the warrants
will be subject to early termination by the counterparties.
The cost incurred in connection with the note hedge
transactions, net of the related tax benefit and the proceeds
from the sale of the warrants, is included as a net reduction in
additional paid-in capital in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets as of October 31, 2007, in accordance with
the guidance in Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
Issue
No. 00-19,
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to,
and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock.
In accordance with SFAS No. 128, Earnings per
Share, the Notes will have no impact on diluted earnings per
share, or EPS, until the price of our common stock exceeds the
conversion price of $44.02 per share because the principal
amount of the Notes will be settled in cash upon conversion.
Prior to conversion we will include the effect of the additional
shares that may be issued if our common stock price exceeds
$44.02 per share, using the treasury stock method. If the price
of our common stock exceeds $62.356 per share, it will also
include the effect of the additional potential shares that may
be issued related to the warrants, using the treasury stock
method. Prior to conversion, the note hedge transactions are not
considered for purposes of the EPS calculation as their effect
would be anti-dilutive.
54
Contractual
Commitments
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of
October 31, 2007 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
1-3
|
|
|
3-5
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Term B loan (including interest)
|
|
$
|
326,720
|
|
|
$
|
20,959
|
|
|
$
|
40,809
|
|
|
$
|
39,488
|
|
|
$
|
225,464
|
|
1.375% Senior convertible notes (including interest)
|
|
|
338,605
|
|
|
|
4,374
|
|
|
|
9,284
|
|
|
|
324,947
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligation
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
47,277
|
|
|
|
10,256
|
|
|
|
15,014
|
|
|
|
10,915
|
|
|
|
11,092
|
|
Minimum purchase obligations
|
|
|
47,428
|
|
|
|
47,428
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
760,094
|
|
|
$
|
83,054
|
|
|
$
|
65,133
|
|
|
$
|
375,351
|
|
|
$
|
236,556
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest in the above table has been calculated using the rate
in effect at October 31, 2007.
We work on a purchase order basis with third-party contract
manufacturers and component suppliers with facilities in China,
Singapore, Israel, and Brazil to supply our inventories. We
issue a forecast to the third-party contract manufacturers and
subsequently agrees to a build schedule to drive component
material purchases and capacity planning. We provide each
manufacturer with a purchase order to cover the manufacturing
requirements, which constitutes a binding commitment by us to
purchase materials produced by the manufacturer as specified in
the purchase order. The total amount of purchase commitments as
of October 31, 2007 was approximately $47.4 million,
and are generally paid within one year. Of this amount,
$4.4 million has been recorded in accrued expenses in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of October 31,
2007 because the commitment is expected not to have future value
to us.
We expect that we will be able to fund our remaining obligations
and commitments with cash flows from operations. To the extent
we are unable to fund these obligations and commitments with
cash flows from operations, we intend to fund these obligations
and commitments with proceeds from our $40.0 million
revolving loan under our secured credit facility or future debt
or equity financings.
Earnings
before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA,
as adjusted)
We define earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and
amortization, or EBITDA, as adjusted, as the sum of (1) net
income (loss) (excluding extraordinary items of gain or loss and
any gain or loss from discontinued operations),
(2) interest expense, (3) income taxes,
(4) depreciation, amortization, goodwill impairment, and
other non-recurring charges, (5) non-cash charges,
including non-cash stock-based compensation expense and purchase
accounting items, and (6) management fees to our principal
stockholder. EBITDA, as adjusted, is a primary component of the
financial covenants to which we are subject under our Credit
Facility. If we fail to maintain required levels of EBITDA, as
adjusted, we could have a default under our Credit Facility,
potentially resulting in an acceleration of all of our
outstanding indebtedness.
Management uses EBITDA, as adjusted, only in addition to and in
conjunction with results presented in accordance with GAAP.
Management believes that the use of this non-GAAP financial
measure, in conjunction with results presented in accordance
with GAAP, helps it to evaluate our performance and to compare
our current results with those for prior periods as well as with
the results of other companies in our industry. Our competitors
may, due to differences in capital structure and investment
history, have interest, tax, depreciation, amortization, and
other non-cash expenses that differ significantly from ours.
Management also uses this non-GAAP financial measure in our
budget and planning process. Management believes that the
presentation of this non-GAAP financial measure may be useful to
investors for many of the same reasons that management finds
these measures useful.
Our EBITDA, as adjusted, contains limitations and should be
considered as a supplement to, and not as a substitute for, or
superior to, disclosures made in accordance with GAAP. EBITDA,
as adjusted, may be different from EBITDA or EBITDA, as
adjusted, calculated by other companies and is not based on any
comprehensive set of accounting rules or principles. In
addition, EBITDA, as adjusted, does not reflect all amounts and
costs, such as employee stock-based compensation costs, periodic
costs of assets used to generate net revenues and costs to
55
replace those assets, cash expenditures or future requirements
for capital expenditures or contractual commitments, cash
requirements for working capital needs, interest expense or the
cash requirements necessary to service interest or principal
payments on our debt, income taxes and the related cash
requirements, restructuring and impairment charges and losses
from discontinued operations, associated with our results of
operations as determined in accordance with GAAP. Furthermore,
we expect to continue to incur expenses similar to those amounts
excluded from EBITDA, as adjusted. Management compensates for
these limitations by also relying on the comparable GAAP
financial measure.
As noted above, management excludes the following items from
EBITDA, as adjusted:
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes. While income taxes
are directly related to the amount of pre-tax income, they are
also impacted by tax laws and the companys tax structure.
As the tax laws and our tax structure are not under the control
of our operational managers, management believes that the
provision for (benefit from) income taxes should be excluded
when evaluating our operational performance.
|
|
|
|
Interest expense and interest income. While working
capital supports the business, management does not believe that
related interest expense or interest income is directly
attributable to the operating performance of our business.
|
|
|
|
Depreciation of property, plant and equipment. Management
excludes depreciation because while tangible assets support the
business, management does not believe the related depreciation
costs are directly attributable to the operating performance of
our business. In addition, depreciation may not be indicative of
current or future capital expenditures.
|
|
|
|
Amortization of capitalized software. Management excludes
amortization of capitalized software because while capitalized
software supports the business, management does not believe the
related amortization costs are directly attributable to the
operating performance of our business. In addition, amortization
of capitalized software may not be indicative of current or
future expenditures to develop software.
|
|
|
|
Amortization of certain acquisition related items. We
incur amortization of purchased core and developed technology
assets, amortization of purchased intangible assets,
amortization of step-down in deferred revenue on acquisition and
amortization of
step-up in
inventory on acquisition in connection with acquisitions.
Management excludes these items because it does not believe
these expenses are reflective of ongoing operating results in
the period incurred. These amounts arise from prior acquisitions
and management does not believe that they have a direct
correlation to the operation of our business.
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development. We incur IPR&D
expenses when technological feasibility for acquired technology
has not been established at the date of acquisition and no
future alternative use for such technology exists. These amounts
arise from prior acquisitions and management does not believe
they have a direct correlation to the operation of
VeriFones business.
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation. These expenses consist
primarily of expenses for employee stock options and restricted
stock units under SFAS No. 123(R). Management excludes
stock-based compensation expenses from non-GAAP financial
measures primarily because they are non-cash expenses which
management believes are not reflective of ongoing operating
results.
|
|
|
|
Acquisition related charges and restructuring costs. This
represents charges incurred for consulting services and other
professional fees associated with acquisition related
activities. These expenses also include charges related to
restructuring activities, including costs associated with
severance, benefits and excess facilities. As management does
not believe that these charges directly relate to the operation
of our business, management believes they should be excluded
when evaluating our operating performance.
|
|
|
|
Management fees to majority stockholder. Management
excludes management fees paid to our majority stockholder (which
were paid prior to our initial public offering) because it does
not believe that these charges directly relate to the operation
of our business.
|
|
|
|
Refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits. Management
excludes the refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits
because it does not believe these amounts directly relate to the
operation of our business.
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash portion of loss on debt extinguishment. This
represents the non-cash portion of loss incurred on the
extinguishment of our credit facility. While this credit
facility supported our business, management does not believe the
related loss on extinguishment is a cost directly attributable
to the operating performance of our business.
|
A reconciliation of net income (loss), the most directly
comparable U.S. GAAP measure, to EBITDA, as adjusted, for
the years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 is as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
|
$
|
5,606
|
|
|
$
|
241
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
24,718
|
|
|
|
32,159
|
|
|
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
4,971
|
|
|
|
12,296
|
|
Interest expense(1)
|
|
|
36,598
|
|
|
|
13,617
|
|
|
|
15,384
|
|
|
|
12,597
|
|
|
|
12,456
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
(6,702
|
)
|
|
|
(3,372
|
)
|
|
|
(598
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of equipment and improvements
|
|
|
7,766
|
|
|
|
3,505
|
|
|
|
3,691
|
|
|
|
2,451
|
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
Amortization of capitalized software
|
|
|
1,220
|
|
|
|
1,231
|
|
|
|
1,173
|
|
|
|
698
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets(2)
|
|
|
59,468
|
|
|
|
10,328
|
|
|
|
11,902
|
|
|
|
19,945
|
|
|
|
24,348
|
|
Amortization of
step-up in
deferred revenue on acquisition(2)
|
|
|
3,735
|
|
|
|
986
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
519
|
|
|
|
1,561
|
|
Amortization of
step-up in
inventory on acquisition
|
|
|
13,823
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
28,892
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
|
1,687
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
Acquisition related charges and restructuring costs
|
|
|
10,234
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management fees to majority stockholder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
Refund of foreign unclaimed pension benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,820
|
)
|
Extinguishment of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
4,764
|
|
|
|
6,359
|
|
|
|
5,630
|
|
|
|
9,810
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA as adjusted
|
|
$
|
157,252
|
|
|
$
|
130,445
|
|
|
$
|
86,423
|
|
|
$
|
57,247
|
|
|
$
|
49,854
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For the year ended October 31, 2007, interest expense
increased due to the increase in the balance of our debt
instruments. |
|
(2) |
|
For the year ended October 31, 2007, these expenses
increased significantly due to the acquisition of Lipman and
PayWare. |
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
Our only off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined in
Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of the SECs
Regulation S-K,
consist of interest rate cap agreements and forward foreign
currency exchange agreements described under
Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures about Market Risk below.
Effects
of Inflation
Our monetary assets, consisting primarily of cash, cash
equivalents, and receivables, are not affected by inflation
because they are short-term and in the case of cash are
immaterial. Our non-monetary assets, consisting primarily of
inventory, intangible assets, goodwill, and prepaid expenses and
other assets, are not affected significantly by inflation. We
believe that replacement costs of equipment, furniture, and
leasehold improvements will not materially affect our
operations. However, the rate of inflation affects our cost of
goods sold and expenses, such as those for employee
compensation, which may not be readily recoverable in the price
of system solutions and services offered by us.
57
Critical
Accounting Estimates
General
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations are based upon our Consolidated
Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. We base
our estimates on historical experience and on various other
assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or
conditions.
An accounting policy is deemed to be critical if it requires an
accounting estimate to be made based on assumptions about
matters that are highly uncertain at the time the estimate is
made, and if different estimates that reasonably could have been
used, or changes in the accounting estimates that are reasonably
likely to occur periodically, could materially impact our
consolidated financial statements. We believe the following
critical accounting policies include our more significant
estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of our
consolidated financial statements. Our significant accounting
policies are described in Note 2 Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies to the Notes to the
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Revenue
Recognition
Net revenues from System Solutions are recognized upon shipment,
delivery, or customer acceptance of the product as required
pursuant to the customer arrangement. Net revenues from services
such as customer support are initially deferred and then
recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the
contract. Net revenues from services such as installations,
equipment repairs, refurbishment arrangements, training, and
consulting are recognized as the services are rendered. For
arrangements with multiple elements, we allocate net revenues to
each element using the residual method based on objective and
reliable evidence of the fair value of the undelivered element.
We defer the portion of the arrangement fee equal to the
objective evidence of fair value of the undelivered elements
until they are delivered.
While the majority of our sales transactions contain standard
business terms and conditions, there are some transactions that
contain non-standard business terms and conditions. As a result,
significant contract interpretation is sometimes required to
determine the appropriate accounting including: (1) whether
an arrangement exists and what is included in the arrangement;
(2) how the arrangement consideration should be allocated
among the deliverables if there are multiple deliverables;
(3) when to recognize net revenues on the deliverables;
(4) whether undelivered elements are essential to the
functionality of delivered elements; and (5) whether we
have fair value for the undelivered elements. In addition, our
revenue recognition policy requires an assessment as to whether
collection is probable, which inherently requires us to evaluate
the creditworthiness of our customers. Changes in judgments on
these assumptions and estimates could materially impact the
timing of revenue recognition.
To a limited extent, we also enter into software development
contracts with our customers that we recognize as net revenues
on a completed contract basis. As a result, estimates of whether
the contract is going to be profitable are necessary since we
are required to record a provision for such loss in the period
when the loss is first identified.
Inventory
Valuation
The valuation of inventories requires us to determine obsolete
or excess inventory and inventory that is not of saleable
quality. The determination of obsolete or excess inventories
requires us to estimate the future demand for our products
within specific time horizons, generally twelve months to
eighteen months. If our demand forecast for specific products is
greater than actual demand and we fail to reduce manufacturing
output accordingly, we could be required to record additional
inventories write-offs, which would have a negative impact on
our gross profit percentage.
We review the adequacy of our inventories valuation on a
quarterly basis. For production inventory, our methodology
involves matching our on-hand and on-order inventories with our
sales estimate over the next twelve and eighteen months. We then
evaluate the inventory found to be in excess of the twelve-month
demand estimate
58
and take appropriate write-downs to reflect the risk of
obsolescence. For on-hand and on-order inventory in excess of
eighteen month requirements we generally record a 100% reserve.
This methodology is significantly affected by our sales
estimates. If actual demand were to be substantially lower than
estimated, additional inventories write-downs for excess or
obsolete inventories may be required.
Warranty
Costs
We accrue for estimated warranty obligations when revenue is
recognized based on an estimate of future warranty costs for
delivered product. Our warranty obligation extends from
13 months to five years from the date of shipment. We
estimate such obligations based on historical experience and
expectations of future costs. Our estimate and judgments is
affected by actual product failure rates and actual costs to
repair. These estimates and judgments are more subjective for
new product introductions as these estimates and judgments are
based on similar products versus actual history.
Product
Returns Reserve and Allowance for Doubtful
Accounts
Product return reserve is an estimate of future product returns
related to current period net revenues based upon historical
experience. Material differences may result in the amount and
timing of our net revenues for any period. We maintain
allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting
from the inability of our customers to pay their invoices to us
in full. We regularly review the adequacy of our accounts
receivable allowance after considering the size of the accounts
receivable balance, each customers expected ability to
pay, aging of accounts receivable balances, and our collection
history with each customer. We make estimates and judgments
about the inability of customers to pay the amount they owe us
which could change significantly if their financial condition
changes or the economy in general deteriorates.
Goodwill
We review goodwill at least annually for impairment. Should
certain events or indicators of impairment occur between annual
impairment tests, we perform the impairment test of goodwill at
that date. In testing for a potential impairment of goodwill,
we: (1) allocate goodwill to our various reporting units to
which the acquired goodwill relates; (2) estimate the fair
value of our reporting units; and (3) determine the
carrying value (book value) of those reporting units, as some of
the assets and liabilities related to those reporting units are
not held by those reporting units but by corporate headquarters.
Furthermore, if the estimated fair value of a reporting unit is
less than the carrying value, we must estimate the fair value of
all identifiable assets and liabilities of that reporting unit,
in a manner similar to a purchase price allocation for an
acquired business. This can require independent valuations of
certain internally generated and unrecognized intangible assets
such as in-process research and development and developed
technology. Only after this process is completed can the amount
of goodwill impairment, if any, be determined.
The process of evaluating the potential impairment of goodwill
is subjective and requires significant judgment at many points
during the analysis. In estimating the fair value of a reporting
unit for the purposes of our annual or periodic analyses, we
make estimates and judgments about the future cash flows of that
reporting unit. Although our cash flow forecasts are based on
assumptions that are consistent with our plans and estimates we
are using to manage the underlying businesses, there is
significant exercise of judgment involved in determining the
cash flows attributable to a reporting unit over its estimated
remaining useful life. In addition, we make certain judgments
about allocating shared assets to the estimated balance sheets
of our reporting units. We also consider our and our
competitors market capitalization on the date we perform
the analysis. Changes in judgment on these assumptions and
estimates could result in a goodwill impairment charge.
Long-lived
Assets
We review our long-lived assets including property and
equipment, capitalized software development costs, and
identifiable intangible assets for indicators of impairment
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying amount of the assets may not be fully recoverable.
Determining if such events or changes in circumstances have
occurred is subjective and judgmental. Should we determine such
events have occurred, we
59
then determine whether such assets are recoverable based on
estimated future undiscounted net cash flows and fair value. If
future undiscounted net cash flows and fair value are less than
the carrying value of such asset, we write down that asset to
its fair value.
We make estimates and judgments about future undiscounted cash
flows and fair value. Although our cash flow forecasts are based
on assumptions that are consistent with our plans, there is
significant exercise of judgment involved in determining the
cash flows attributable to a long-lived asset over its estimated
remaining useful life. Our estimates of anticipated future cash
flows could be reduced significantly in the future. As a result,
the carrying amount of our long-lived assets could be reduced
through impairment charges in the future. Additionally, changes
in estimated future cash flows could result in a shortening of
estimated useful lives for long-lived assets including
intangibles.
Contingencies
and Litigation
We evaluate contingent liabilities including threatened or
pending litigation in accordance with SFAS No. 5,
Accounting for Contingencies. We assess the likelihood of
any adverse judgments or outcomes to a potential claim or legal
proceeding, as well as potential ranges of probable losses, when
the outcomes of the claims or proceedings are probable and
reasonably estimable. A determination of the amount of accrued
liabilities required, if any, for these contingencies is made
after the analysis of each matter. Because of uncertainties
related to these matters, we base our estimates on the
information available at the time. As additional information
becomes available, we reassess the potential liability related
to pending claims and litigation and may revise our estimates.
Any revisions in the estimates of potential liabilities could
have a material impact on our results of operations and
financial position.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Effective May 1, 2005, we adopted the
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, which
requires us to measure compensation cost for all outstanding
unvested share-based awards at fair value and recognize
compensation over the requisite service period for awards
expected to vest. The estimation of stock awards that will
ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual
results differ from our estimates, such amounts will be recorded
as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised.
In valuing share-based awards, significant judgment is required
in determining the expected volatility of our common stock and
the expected term individuals will hold their share-based awards
prior to exercising. Expected volatility of the stock is based
on a blend of our peer group in the industry in which we do
business and the historical volatility of our own stock. The
expected term of options granted is derived from the historical
actual term of option grants and represents the period of time
that options granted are expected to be outstanding. In the
future, our expected volatility and expected term may change
which could substantially change the grant-date fair value of
future awards of stock options and ultimately the expense we
record.
Business
Combinations
We are required to allocate the purchase price of acquired
companies to the tangible and intangible assets acquired and
liabilities assumed, as well as IPR&D, based on their
estimated fair values. Such valuations require management to
make significant estimates and assumptions, especially with
respect to intangible assets. The significant purchased
intangible assets recorded by us include customer relationship,
developed and core technology and the trade name.
Critical estimates in valuing intangible assets include but are
not limited to: future expected cash flows from customer
contracts, customer lists, distribution agreements and acquired
developed technologies and patents; expected costs to develop
IPR&D into commercially viable products and estimating cash
flows from projects when completed; brand awareness and market
position, as well as assumptions about the period of time the
brand will continue to be used in our product portfolio; and
discount rates. Managements estimates of fair value are
based upon assumptions believed to be reasonable, but which are
inherently uncertain and unpredictable and, as a result, actual
results may differ from estimates.
60
Restructuring
We monitor and regularly evaluate our organizational structure
and associated operating expenses. Depending on events and
circumstances, we may decide to take additional actions to
reduce future operating costs as our business requirements
evolve. In determining restructuring charges, we analyze our
future operating requirements, including the required headcount
by business functions and facility space requirements. Our
restructuring costs, and any resulting accruals, involve
significant estimates using the best information available at
the time the estimates are made. These restructuring costs are
accounted for under SFAS No. 146, Accounting for
Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities. In
recording severance reserves, we accrue a liability when all of
the following conditions have been met: management, having the
authority to approve the action, commits to a plan of
termination; the plan identifies the number of employees to be
terminated, their job classifications and their locations, and
the expected completion date; the plan is communicated such that
the terms of the benefit arrangement are explained in sufficient
detail to enable employees to determine the type and amount of
benefits they will receive if they are involuntarily terminated;
and actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is
unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or
that the plan will be withdrawn. In recording facilities lease
loss reserves, we make various assumptions, including the time
period over which the facilities are expected to be vacant,
expected sublease terms, expected sublease rates, anticipated
future operating expenses, and expected future use of the
facilities. Our estimates involve a number of risks and
uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control, including
future real estate market conditions and our ability to
successfully enter into subleases or lease termination
agreements with terms as favorable as those assumed when
arriving at our estimates. We regularly evaluate a number of
factors to determine the appropriateness and reasonableness of
our restructuring and lease loss accruals including the various
assumptions noted above. If actual results differ significantly
from our estimates, we may be required to adjust our
restructuring and lease loss accruals in the future.
We also incur costs from our plan to exit certain activities of
companies acquired in business combinations. These costs are
recognized as a liability on the date of the acquisition under
EITF 95-3,
Recognition of Liabilities in Connection with a Purchase
Business Combination, when both of the following conditions
are met: management assesses, formulates, and approves a plan to
exit the activity; and the exit plan identifies the activities
to be disposed, the locations of those activities, the method of
disposition, all significant actions needed to complete the
plan, and the expected date of completion of the plan.
Income
Taxes
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
expected tax consequences of temporary differences between the
tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts
using enacted tax rates in effect for the year the differences
are expected to reverse. In evaluating our ability to recover
our deferred tax assets we consider all available positive and
negative evidence including our past operating results, the
existence of cumulative losses in past fiscal years and our
forecast of future taxable income in the jurisdictions in which
we have operations.
We have recorded a valuation allowance on our foreign tax
credits carryforwards, foreign taxes on basis differences, and
tax deductible intangible assets reversing beyond 2010 and
various non-U.S. net operating losses because realization
of these tax benefits through future taxable income cannot be
reasonably assured. We intend to maintain the valuation
allowances until sufficient positive evidence exists to support
that it is more likely than not the deferred tax assets will be
realized. An increase in the valuation allowance would result in
additional expense in each period the balance increases. We make
estimates and judgments about our future taxable income that are
based on assumptions that are consistent with our plans and
estimates. Should the actual amounts differ from our estimates,
the amount of our valuation allowance could be materially
impacted.
We must make certain estimates and judgments in determining
income tax expense for financial statement purposes. These
estimates and judgments occur in the calculation of tax credits
and deductions, and in the calculation of certain tax assets and
liabilities, which arise from differences in the timing of
recognition of revenue and expense for tax and financial
statement purposes, as well as the interest and penalties
relating to these uncertain tax positions. Significant changes
to these estimates may result in an increase or decrease to our
tax provision in a subsequent period.
61
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
APB 14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement). FSP APB
14-1
requires the issuer of convertible debt instruments with cash
settlement features to account separately for the liability and
equity components of the instrument. The debt would be
recognized at the present value of its cash flows discounted
using the issuers nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at
the time of issuance. The equity component would be recognized
as the difference between the proceeds from the issuance of the
note and the fair value of the liability. The FSP also requires
accretion of the resultant debt discount over the expected life
of the debt. The FSP is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those
years. Entities are required to apply the FSP retrospectively
for all periods presented. We are currently evaluating FSP APB
14-1 and
have not yet determined the impact its adoption will have on our
consolidated financial statements. However, the impact of this
new accounting treatment will be significant and will result in
a significant increase to non-cash interest expense beginning in
fiscal year 2010 for financial statements covering past and
future periods.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements an amendment of ARB No. 51.
SFAS No. 160 will change the accounting and
reporting for minority interests, which will be recharacterized
as noncontrolling interests (NCI) and classified as
a component of equity. In conjunction with
SFAS No. 141(R), discussed below,
SFAS No. 160 will significantly change the accounting
for partial
and/or step
acquisitions. SFAS No. 160 will be effective for us in
the first quarter of fiscal year 2010. Early adoption is not
permitted. We are currently evaluating SFAS No. 160
and have not yet determined the impact, if any, its adoption
will have on our consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations. SFAS No. 141(R) changes
the accounting for business combinations including the
measurement of acquirer shares issued in consideration for a
business combination, the recognition of contingent
consideration, the accounting for pre-acquisition gain and loss
contingencies, the recognition of capitalized in-process
research and development as an indefinite-lived intangible asset
until approved or discontinued rather than as an immediate
expense, expensing restructuring costs in connection with an
acquisition rather than adding them to the cost of an
acquisition, the treatment of acquisition-related transaction
costs, the recognition of changes in the acquirers income
tax valuation allowance, and accounting for partial
and/or step
acquisitions. SFAS No. 141(R) is effective on a
prospective basis for all business combinations for which the
acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first
annual period subsequent to December 15, 2008, with the
exception of the accounting for valuation allowances on deferred
taxes and acquired tax contingencies under
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
Early adoption is not permitted. When SFAS No. 141(R)
becomes effective (which will be in the first quarter of our
fiscal year 2010), any adjustments made to valuation allowances
on deferred taxes and acquired tax contingencies associated with
acquisitions that closed prior to the effective date of
SFAS No. 141(R) will be recorded through income tax
expense, whereas currently the accounting treatment would
require any adjustment to be recognized through the purchase
price. We are currently evaluating SFAS No. 141(R) and
have not yet determined the impact, if any, its adoption will
have on our consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities. SFAS No. 159 permits entities to
elect to measure financial instruments and liabilities at fair
value. The objective of the guidance is to improve financial
reporting by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate
volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring related
assets and liabilities differently, without having to apply
complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years, provided the
provisions of SFAS No. 157 are applied. We are
evaluating SFAS No. 159 and have not yet determined
the impact, if any, its adoption will have on our consolidated
financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157 defines
fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS No. 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements but rather eliminates inconsistencies in guidance
found in various prior accounting
62
pronouncements. On February 12, 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157. FSP
FAS 157-2
defers the implementation of SFAS No. 157 for certain
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities. The remainder
of SFAS No. 157 is effective for us beginning in the
first quarter of fiscal year 2010. The implementation of
SFAS No. 157 is not expected to have a material impact
on our consolidated financial statements.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, which clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement
attribute for the financial statement recognition and
measurement of a tax position. FIN 48 indicates that an
enterprise shall initially recognize the financial statement
effects of a tax position when it is more likely than not of
being sustained on examination, based on the technical merits of
the position. In addition, FIN 48 indicates that the
measurement of a tax position that meets the more likely than
not threshold shall consider the amounts and probabilities of
the outcomes that could be realized upon ultimate settlement.
This interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006 and interim periods within those
fiscal years. We adopted FIN 48 as of November 1,
2007, as required. Upon initial adoption, the Company expects
the impact on its financial position and results of operations
to be an increase in tax liabilities of approximately
$3.3 million. This will be reported as a $1.4 million
decrease to the opening balance of retained earnings, an
increase to the non-current deferred tax assets of
$0.5 million, and a $1.4 million increase to goodwill.
There will also be a reclassification of $17.7 million from
current taxes payable to non-current taxes payable as of the
date of adoption. The Company expects an increase in the
effective income tax rate in future years along with greater
volatility in the effective tax rate due to the adoption of
FIN 48.
Selected
Quarterly Results of Operations
The following selected quarterly data should be read in
conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes
and Item 7 Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
This information has been derived from our unaudited
consolidated financial statements that, in our opinion, reflect
all recurring adjustments necessary to fairly present
63
our financial information when read in conjunction with our
Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes. The results of
operations for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of the
results to be expected for any future period.
Quarterly
Consolidated Statements of Operations for 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended October 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Solutions
|
|
$
|
188,966
|
|
|
$
|
191,469
|
|
|
$
|
205,972
|
|
|
$
|
205,882
|
|
Services
|
|
|
27,397
|
|
|
|
25,414
|
|
|
|
25,729
|
|
|
|
32,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
|
216,363
|
|
|
|
216,883
|
|
|
|
231,701
|
|
|
|
237,945
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues excluding amortization of purchased core
and developed technology assets(1)(2)(5)
|
|
|
123,682
|
|
|
|
116,365
|
|
|
|
122,990
|
|
|
|
145,061
|
|
Amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets
|
|
|
9,609
|
|
|
|
9,586
|
|
|
|
9,278
|
|
|
|
9,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of System Solutions net revenues
|
|
|
133,291
|
|
|
|
125,951
|
|
|
|
132,268
|
|
|
|
154,485
|
|
Services
|
|
|
14,449
|
|
|
|
13,286
|
|
|
|
13,837
|
|
|
|
16,093
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
147,740
|
|
|
|
139,237
|
|
|
|
146,105
|
|
|
|
170,578
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
68,623
|
|
|
|
77,646
|
|
|
|
85,596
|
|
|
|
67,367
|
|
Operating expenses:(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
16,898
|
|
|
|
16,009
|
|
|
|
15,365
|
|
|
|
17,158
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
23,040
|
|
|
|
22,823
|
|
|
|
23,686
|
|
|
|
26,746
|
|
General and administrative(3)
|
|
|
17,376
|
|
|
|
25,565
|
|
|
|
19,364
|
|
|
|
18,399
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets
|
|
|
5,351
|
|
|
|
5,690
|
|
|
|
5,416
|
|
|
|
5,114
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,560
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
69,225
|
|
|
|
70,177
|
|
|
|
63,831
|
|
|
|
67,519
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (expense)
|
|
|
(602
|
)
|
|
|
7,469
|
|
|
|
21,765
|
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(9,756
|
)
|
|
|
(9,507
|
)
|
|
|
(9,468
|
)
|
|
|
(7,867
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
991
|
|
|
|
1,534
|
|
|
|
2,226
|
|
|
|
1,951
|
|
Other income (expense), net(4)
|
|
|
(261
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(4,156
|
)
|
|
|
(3,463
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(9,628
|
)
|
|
|
(506
|
)
|
|
|
10,367
|
|
|
|
(9,531
|
)
|
Provision for income taxes(6)
|
|
|
(3,949
|
)
|
|
|
4,312
|
|
|
|
52,753
|
|
|
|
(28,398
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
(5,679
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4,818
|
)
|
|
$
|
(42,386
|
)
|
|
$
|
18,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common share diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.07
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Stock-based compensation included above:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues System Solutions
|
|
$
|
917
|
|
|
$
|
930
|
|
|
$
|
570
|
|
|
$
|
581
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,466
|
|
|
|
1,433
|
|
|
|
1,443
|
|
|
$
|
1,595
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
1,829
|
|
|
|
1,683
|
|
|
|
1,974
|
|
|
$
|
3,456
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
3,584
|
|
|
|
4,253
|
|
|
|
1,872
|
|
|
$
|
1,306
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,796
|
|
|
$
|
8,299
|
|
|
$
|
5,859
|
|
|
$
|
6,938
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Included amortization of
step-up in
inventory fair value of $10.3 million and $3.4 million
in the first quarter and second quarter of fiscal 2007,
respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
In the second quarter of fiscal 2007, included $5.7 million
of consulting and legal integration expenses supporting a review
of the operational controls of former Lipman entities,
production of documents in response |
64
|
|
|
|
|
to the U.S. Department of Justice investigation related to
the Lipman acquisition and a $1.0 million charge to
terminate a distributor agreement where there was a channel
conflict between Lipman and VeriFone. |
|
(4) |
|
In the third quarter of fiscal year 2007, we incurred expenses
of $4.8 million related to the write-off of debt issuance
costs in connection with the extinguishment of debt. |
|
(5) |
|
In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007, we incurred $5.3
million of excess obsolescence and scrap charges, $3.1 million
of charges relating to the commitment to purchase excess
components from our contract manufacturers, and $3.2 million for
a product specific warranty reserve for an acquired product. |
|
(6) |
|
The provision for income taxes for the three months ended
July 31, 2007 and the three months ended October 31,
2007, are an expense of $52.8 million and a benefit of
($28.4) million, respectively. These amounts are
substantially different than tax computed at a statutory rate of
35%. The effective rates differ from the statutory rate due to
two principal factors. First, under FIN 18, our quarterly
tax provision is determined by applying the estimated annual
effective rate to our pretax income for the quarter as adjusted
for discrete items. The estimated annual rate for FIN 18
purposes was 340%. This results in a tax expense of
$55.0 million and a tax benefit of ($28.7) million
before discrete tax adjustments for the three months ended
July 31, 2007 and the three months ended October 31,
2007, respectively. We offset these amounts with approximately
($2.2) million of discrete tax benefit and
$0.3 million of discrete tax expense items to obtain the
tax provision for the three month periods ended July 31,
2007 and October 31, 2007, respectively. Secondly, we
recorded a significant increase in the valuation allowance for
deferred tax assets during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007. The increase in valuation allowance
resulted in a significantly larger provision for taxes which has
been allocated to the quarterly results under FIN 18. |
65
Quarterly
Consolidated Statements of Operations for 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended October 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
Quarter
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Solutions
|
|
$
|
118,685
|
|
|
$
|
128,136
|
|
|
$
|
131,960
|
|
|
$
|
138,373
|
|
Services
|
|
|
15,945
|
|
|
|
14,054
|
|
|
|
15,657
|
|
|
|
18,260
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
|
134,630
|
|
|
|
142,190
|
|
|
|
147,617
|
|
|
|
156,633
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues excluding amortization of purchased core
and developed technology assets(1)
|
|
|
65,522
|
|
|
|
70,346
|
|
|
|
71,633
|
|
|
|
73,922
|
|
Amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets
|
|
|
1,593
|
|
|
|
1,419
|
|
|
|
1,071
|
|
|
|
1,542
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of System Solutions net revenues
|
|
|
67,115
|
|
|
|
71,765
|
|
|
|
72,704
|
|
|
|
75,464
|
|
Services
|
|
|
7,913
|
|
|
|
7,026
|
|
|
|
8,452
|
|
|
|
9,086
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
75,028
|
|
|
|
78,791
|
|
|
|
81,156
|
|
|
|
84,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
59,602
|
|
|
|
63,399
|
|
|
|
66,461
|
|
|
|
72,083
|
|
Operating expenses:(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
11,407
|
|
|
|
12,221
|
|
|
|
11,726
|
|
|
|
11,999
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
14,201
|
|
|
|
14,404
|
|
|
|
14,181
|
|
|
|
15,821
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
9,698
|
|
|
|
9,993
|
|
|
|
10,936
|
|
|
|
11,946
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets
|
|
|
1,159
|
|
|
|
1,159
|
|
|
|
1,159
|
|
|
|
1,226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
36,465
|
|
|
|
37,777
|
|
|
|
38,002
|
|
|
|
40,992
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
23,137
|
|
|
|
25,622
|
|
|
|
28,459
|
|
|
|
31,091
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3,279
|
)
|
|
|
(3,197
|
)
|
|
|
(3,438
|
)
|
|
|
(3,703
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
687
|
|
|
|
927
|
|
|
|
938
|
|
|
|
820
|
|
Other income (expense), net(2)
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
(195
|
)
|
|
|
(6,465
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
20,746
|
|
|
|
23,417
|
|
|
|
25,764
|
|
|
|
21,743
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
6,952
|
|
|
|
8,381
|
|
|
|
9,009
|
|
|
|
7,817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
13,794
|
|
|
$
|
15,036
|
|
|
$
|
16,755
|
|
|
$
|
13,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Stock-based compensation included above:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues System Solutions
|
|
$
|
153
|
|
|
$
|
162
|
|
|
$
|
204
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
|
478
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
409
|
|
|
|
569
|
|
|
|
748
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
259
|
|
|
|
408
|
|
|
|
587
|
|
|
|
786
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
923
|
|
|
$
|
1,189
|
|
|
$
|
1,686
|
|
|
$
|
2,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, we incurred expenses
of $6.4 million associated with debt refinancing. |
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest
rates and foreign currency exchange rates. To mitigate some of
these risks, we utilize derivative financial instruments to
hedge these exposures. We do not use
66
derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading
purposes. We do not anticipate any material changes in our
primary market risk exposures in fiscal 2008.
Interest
Rate Risk
We are exposed to interest rate risk related to our debt, which
bears interest based upon the three-month LIBOR rate. We have
reduced our exposure to interest rate fluctuations through the
purchase of interest rate caps covering a portion of our
variable rate debt. In fiscal year 2006, we purchased two-year
interest rate caps for $118,000 with an initial notional amount
of $200 million declining to $150 million after one
year with an effective date of November 1, 2006 under which
we will receive interest payments if the three-month LIBOR rate
exceeds 6.5%. Based on effective interest rates at
October 31, 2007, a 50 basis point increase in
interest rates on our borrowings subject to variable interest
rate fluctuations would increase our interest expense by
approximately $1.2 million annually.
Foreign
Currency Risk
A majority of our business consists of sales made to customers
outside the United States. A substantial portion of the net
revenues we receive from such sales is denominated in currencies
other than the U.S. dollar. Additionally, portions of our
costs of net revenues and our other operating expenses are
incurred by our International operations and denominated in
local currencies. While fluctuations in the value of these net
revenues, costs, and expenses as measured in U.S. dollars
have not materially affected our results of operations
historically, we cannot assure you that adverse currency
exchange rate fluctuations will not have a material impact in
the future. In addition, our balance sheet reflects
non-U.S. dollar
denominated assets and liabilities which can be adversely
affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates. In certain
periods, we have not hedged our exposure to these fluctuations.
Historically, we have entered into foreign currency forward
contracts and other arrangements intended to hedge our exposure
to adverse fluctuations in exchange rates. As of
October 31, 2007, we had no foreign currency forward
contracts outstanding. On November 1, 2007, we entered into
foreign currency forward contracts with aggregate notional
amounts of $40.2 million to hedge exposures to
non-functional currencies. If we had chosen not to enter into
foreign currency forward contracts to hedge against these
exposures and if the hedge currencies were to devalue 5% to 10%
against the U.S. dollar, results of operations would
include a foreign exchange loss of approximately
$2.0 million to $4.0 million.
Hedging arrangements of this sort may not always be effective to
protect our results of operations against currency exchange rate
fluctuations, particularly in the event of imprecise forecasts
of
non-U.S. denominated
assets and liabilities. Accordingly, if there were an adverse
movement in exchange rates, we might suffer significant losses.
For instance, for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, we suffered foreign currency contract losses of
$2.3 million, $0.5 million, and $0.8 million,
respectively, net of foreign currency transaction gains, despite
our hedging activities.
Equity
Price Risk
In June 2007, we sold $316.2 million aggregate principal
amount of 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes due 2012 (the
Notes). Holders may convert their Notes prior to
maturity upon the occurrence of certain circumstances. Upon
conversion, we would pay the holder the cash value of the
applicable number of shares of VeriFone common stock, up to the
principal amount of the Notes. Amounts in excess of the
principal amount, if any may be paid in cash or in stock at our
option. Concurrent with the issuance of the Notes, we entered
into note hedge transactions and separately, warrant
transactions, to reduce the potential dilution from the
conversion of the Notes and to mitigate any negative effect such
conversion may have on the price of our common stock.
67
|
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
|
INDEX TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
68
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. (and subsidiaries) as of
October 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity and
comprehensive income and cash flows for each of the three years
in the period ended October 31, 2007. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of VeriFone Holdings, Inc. (and subsidiaries)
at October 31, 2007 and 2006, and the consolidated results
of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended October 31, 2007, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
As discussed in Note 2 to the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements, under the heading Stock-Based
Compensation, in fiscal 2005 VeriFone Holdings, Inc. changed its
method of accounting for stock-based compensation.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s internal control over financial
reporting as of October 31, 2007, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated
August 19, 2008 expressed an adverse opinion on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.
San Francisco, California
August 19, 2008
69
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.
We have audited VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s internal control
over financial reporting as of October 31, 2007, based on
criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO
criteria). VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting included in the
accompanying Report of Management on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on the Companys internal control over financial reporting
based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of
deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such
that there is a reasonable possibility that a material
misstatement of the companys annual or interim financial
statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
In its assessment management has identified material weaknesses
in controls over the process for preparation, review, approval
and entry of manual, nonstandard journal entries; maintaining
sufficient qualified accounting and finance personnel; the
supervision, monitoring and monthly financial statement review
processes; and, the identification, documentation and review of
various income tax calculations, reconciliations and related
supporting documentation. These material weaknesses were
considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of
audit tests applied in our audit of the 2007 financial
statements, and this report does not affect our report dated
August 19, 2008 on those financial statements.
In our opinion, because of the effect of the material weaknesses
described above on the achievement of the objectives of the
control criteria, VeriFone Holdings, Inc. has not maintained
effective internal control over financial reporting as of
October 31, 2007, based on the COSO criteria.
San Francisco, California
August 19, 2008
70
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except par value)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
215,001
|
|
|
$
|
86,564
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $4,270 and $2,364
|
|
|
194,146
|
|
|
|
119,839
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
107,168
|
|
|
|
86,631
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
23,854
|
|
|
|
13,267
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
63,413
|
|
|
|
12,943
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
603,582
|
|
|
|
319,244
|
|
Property, plant, and equipment, net
|
|
|
48,293
|
|
|
|
7,300
|
|
Purchased intangible assets, net
|
|
|
170,073
|
|
|
|
16,544
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
611,977
|
|
|
|
52,689
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
67,796
|
|
|
|
21,706
|
|
Debt issuance costs, net
|
|
|
12,855
|
|
|
|
10,987
|
|
Transaction costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,350
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
32,733
|
|
|
|
12,125
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,547,309
|
|
|
$
|
452,945
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
105,215
|
|
|
$
|
66,685
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
19,530
|
|
|
|
5,951
|
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
|
21,201
|
|
|
|
16,202
|
|
Accrued warranty
|
|
|
11,012
|
|
|
|
4,902
|
|
Deferred revenue, net
|
|
|
43,049
|
|
|
|
23,567
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
6,154
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
8,755
|
|
|
|
4,752
|
|
Accrued transaction costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
84,773
|
|
|
|
13,655
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
5,386
|
|
|
|
1,985
|
|
Restructuring liabilities
|
|
|
1,692
|
|
|
|
2,963
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
306,767
|
|
|
|
152,668
|
|
Accrued warranty
|
|
|
655
|
|
|
|
530
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
11,274
|
|
|
|
7,371
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
547,766
|
|
|
|
190,904
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
87,142
|
|
|
|
859
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
10,296
|
|
|
|
1,872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
963,900
|
|
|
|
354,204
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
2,487
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock: 10,000 shares authorized as of
October 31, 2007 and 2006; No shares issued and oustanding
as of October 31, 2007 and 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock: $0.01 par value, 100,000 shares
authorized at October 31, 2007 and 2006; 84,060 and
68,148 shares issued and outstanding as of October 31,
2007 and 2006
|
|
|
841
|
|
|
|
682
|
|
Additional
paid-in-capital
|
|
|
635,404
|
|
|
|
140,569
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(77,484
|
)
|
|
|
(43,468
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
22,161
|
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
580,922
|
|
|
|
98,741
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
1,547,309
|
|
|
$
|
452,945
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
71
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Solutions
|
|
$
|
792,289
|
|
|
$
|
517,154
|
|
|
$
|
429,741
|
|
Services
|
|
|
110,603
|
|
|
|
63,916
|
|
|
|
55,626
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
|
902,892
|
|
|
|
581,070
|
|
|
|
485,367
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
System Solutions
|
|
|
545,995
|
|
|
|
287,048
|
|
|
|
259,411
|
|
Services
|
|
|
57,665
|
|
|
|
32,477
|
|
|
|
29,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
603,660
|
|
|
|
319,525
|
|
|
|
288,542
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
299,232
|
|
|
|
261,545
|
|
|
|
196,825
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
65,430
|
|
|
|
47,353
|
|
|
|
41,830
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
96,295
|
|
|
|
58,607
|
|
|
|
52,231
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
80,704
|
|
|
|
42,573
|
|
|
|
29,609
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets
|
|
|
21,571
|
|
|
|
4,703
|
|
|
|
4,967
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
270,752
|
|
|
|
153,236
|
|
|
|
128,637
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
28,480
|
|
|
|
108,309
|
|
|
|
68,188
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(36,598
|
)
|
|
|
(13,617
|
)
|
|
|
(15,384
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
6,702
|
|
|
|
3,372
|
|
|
|
598
|
|
Other expense, net
|
|
|
(7,882
|
)
|
|
|
(6,394
|
)
|
|
|
(6,673
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
|
91,670
|
|
|
|
46,729
|
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
24,718
|
|
|
|
32,159
|
|
|
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares used in computing net income
(loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
66,217
|
|
|
|
58,318
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
68,894
|
|
|
|
61,460
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
72
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Voting
|
|
|
Non Voting
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Stock-Based
|
|
|
(Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Deficit)
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Balance as of October 31, 2004
|
|
|
56,430
|
|
|
$
|
564
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
146
|
|
|
$
|
(146
|
)
|
|
$
|
(136,218
|
)
|
|
$
|
267
|
|
|
$
|
(135,387
|
)
|
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
11,211
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125,947
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,059
|
|
Conversion of nonvoting to voting common stock
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of unvested restricted common stock
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
Deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
(442
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of deferred stock-based compensation upon adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(536
|
)
|
|
|
536
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation under SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,635
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,635
|
|
Tax benefit on stock-based compensation under
SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
441
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
441
|
|
Comprehensive Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,239
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
341
|
|
|
|
341
|
|
Unrealized loss on marketable securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Unrecognized gain on interest rate hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,712
|
|
Reclassification of common stock that vested
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 31, 2005
|
|
|
67,646
|
|
|
|
676
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128,101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(102,979
|
)
|
|
|
740
|
|
|
|
26,538
|
|
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
502
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,056
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,062
|
|
Stock-based compensation under SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,998
|
|
Tax benefit on stock-based compensation under
SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,414
|
|
Comprehensive Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,511
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,511
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Unrecognized loss on interest rate hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 31, 2006
|
|
|
68,148
|
|
|
|
682
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,569
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43,468
|
)
|
|
|
958
|
|
|
|
98,741
|
|
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs
|
|
|
2,450
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,744
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,768
|
|
Common stock issued for acquisition of Lipman
|
|
|
13,462
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
417,471
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
417,606
|
|
Fair value of options assumed in acquisition of Lipman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,622
|
|
Stock-based compensation under SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,892
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,892
|
|
Tax benefit on stock-based compensation under
SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,464
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,464
|
|
Purchase of convertible note hedge, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,546
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,546
|
)
|
Issuance of warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,188
|
|
Comprehensive Income (Loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,016
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,221
|
|
|
|
21,221
|
|
Unrealized loss on marketable securities, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Unrecognized loss on interest rate hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,813
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 31, 2007
|
|
|
84,060
|
|
|
$
|
841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
635,404
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(77,484
|
)
|
|
$
|
22,161
|
|
|
$
|
580,922
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
73
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided
by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangible assets
|
|
|
59,468
|
|
|
|
10,328
|
|
|
|
11,902
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of property, plant, and equipment
|
|
|
7,766
|
|
|
|
3,505
|
|
|
|
3,691
|
|
Amortization of capitalized software
|
|
|
1,220
|
|
|
|
1,231
|
|
|
|
1,173
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-off of property, plant, and equipment
|
|
|
271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of interest rate caps
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
Amortization of debt issuance costs
|
|
|
1,756
|
|
|
|
1,105
|
|
|
|
1,150
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
28,892
|
|
|
|
6,000
|
|
|
|
1,687
|
|
Non-cash portion of loss on debt extinguishment
|
|
|
4,764
|
|
|
|
6,359
|
|
|
|
2,898
|
|
Minority interest and equity in earnings of affiliates and other
|
|
|
(149
|
)
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities before changes in
working capital
|
|
|
76,738
|
|
|
|
88,223
|
|
|
|
55,832
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
(39,493
|
)
|
|
|
(28,938
|
)
|
|
|
(8,817
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
45,133
|
|
|
|
(51,983
|
)
|
|
|
(3,407
|
)
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(29,092
|
)
|
|
|
(5,801
|
)
|
|
|
(9,853
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(41,512
|
)
|
|
|
(4,444
|
)
|
|
|
(269
|
)
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(5,136
|
)
|
|
|
(2,106
|
)
|
|
|
(1,118
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
28,144
|
|
|
|
17,189
|
|
|
|
3,227
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
20,391
|
|
|
|
1,542
|
|
|
|
2,403
|
|
Tax benefit from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(11,464
|
)
|
|
|
(3,414
|
)
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
Accrued compensation
|
|
|
(2,975
|
)
|
|
|
2,656
|
|
|
|
838
|
|
Accrued warranty
|
|
|
(1,910
|
)
|
|
|
(1,301
|
)
|
|
|
1,448
|
|
Deferred revenue, net
|
|
|
14,495
|
|
|
|
7,150
|
|
|
|
3,464
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
38,295
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
(2,047
|
)
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities
|
|
|
(2,344
|
)
|
|
|
(2,090
|
)
|
|
|
(1,101
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
89,270
|
|
|
|
16,747
|
|
|
|
40,159
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software development costs capitalized
|
|
|
(7,740
|
)
|
|
|
(1,999
|
)
|
|
|
(863
|
)
|
Purchases of property, plant, and equipment, net
|
|
|
(30,225
|
)
|
|
|
(3,666
|
)
|
|
|
(3,121
|
)
|
Purchases of other assets
|
|
|
(500
|
)
|
|
|
(903
|
)
|
|
|
(863
|
)
|
Purchases of marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,034
|
)
|
|
|
(23,952
|
)
|
Sales and maturities of marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141,869
|
|
|
|
7,200
|
|
Transaction costs, pending acquistions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,425
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of equity investments
|
|
|
(5,700
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of businesses, net of cash and cash equivalents
acquired
|
|
|
(267,531
|
)
|
|
|
(10,867
|
)
|
|
|
(13,405
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(311,696
|
)
|
|
|
(4,025
|
)
|
|
|
(35,004
|
)
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from revolving promissory notes payable and revolver
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,680
|
|
Repayments of revolving promissory notes payable and revolver
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19,680
|
)
|
Proceeds from long-term debt, net of costs
|
|
|
613,197
|
|
|
|
184,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of hedge on convertible debt
|
|
|
(80,236
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of warrants
|
|
|
31,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(263,804
|
)
|
|
|
(182,552
|
)
|
|
|
(78,972
|
)
|
Tax benefit of stock-based compensation
|
|
|
11,464
|
|
|
|
3,414
|
|
|
|
441
|
|
Repayments of capital leases
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
(144
|
)
|
|
|
(409
|
)
|
Investment in subsidiary by minority stockholder
|
|
|
1,050
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,950
|
|
Payments of IPO and follow-on financing costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,444
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercises of stock options
|
|
|
37,088
|
|
|
|
3,015
|
|
|
|
753
|
|
Other
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
349,920
|
|
|
|
7,834
|
|
|
|
47,319
|
|
Effect of foreign currency exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
|
943
|
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
128,437
|
|
|
|
21,499
|
|
|
|
52,360
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
86,564
|
|
|
|
65,065
|
|
|
|
12,705
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
$
|
215,001
|
|
|
$
|
86,564
|
|
|
$
|
65,065
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest
|
|
$
|
29,765
|
|
|
$
|
12,402
|
|
|
$
|
14,843
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for income taxes
|
|
$
|
27,301
|
|
|
$
|
37,253
|
|
|
$
|
22,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schedule of noncash transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt issuance costs withheld from proceeds
|
|
$
|
8,388
|
|
|
$
|
8,720
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock and stock options for acquisition
|
|
$
|
435,228
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock for IPO services
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
74
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|
Note 1.
|
Description
of the Business and Basis of Presentation
|
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. (VeriFone or the
Company) was incorporated in the state of Delaware
on June 13, 2002. Prior to the Companys initial
public offering on May 4, 2005, VeriFone was majority-owned
by GTCR Fund VII, L.P., an equity fund managed by GTCR
Golder Rauner, LLC (GTCR), a private equity firm.
VeriFone designs, markets, and services electronic payment
solutions that enable secure electronic payments among
consumers, merchants, and financial institutions.
On November 1, 2006, the Company acquired all of the
outstanding ordinary shares of Lipman Electronic Engineering
Ltd. (Lipman). The consideration paid to acquire
Lipman was $347.4 million in cash, 13,462,474 shares
of common stock of the Company, and assumption of all
outstanding Lipman stock options. See
Note 3 Business Combinations of
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
information related to this business combination.
|
|
Note 2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Principles
of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of the Company and its majority-owned subsidiaries. All
significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been
eliminated.
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosures of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements, and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. The Company bases its estimates on
historical experience and various other assumptions that are
believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual
results could differ from those estimates, and such differences
may be material to the consolidated financial statements.
Reclassifications
Certain amounts reported in previous periods have been
reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. The
reclassifications did not impact previously reported revenues,
total operating expense, operating income, net income, or
stockholders equity.
Foreign
Currency Translation
The assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries, where the
local currency is the functional currency, are translated from
their respective functional currencies into U.S. dollars at
the rates in effect at the balance sheet date, with resulting
foreign currency translation adjustments recorded as accumulated
other comprehensive income in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheet. Revenue and expense amounts are translated at
average rates during the period.
Gains and losses realized from transactions, including
intercompany balances not considered to be a permanent
investment, denominated in currencies other than an
entitys functional currency are included in other expense,
net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
Revenue
Recognition
The Companys revenue recognition policy is consistent with
applicable revenue recognition guidance and interpretations,
including the requirements of Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) Issue
No. 00-21,
Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables,
Statement of Position (SOP)
97-2,
Software Revenue Recognition,
SOP 81-1,
Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and Certain
Production Type Contracts, Staff
75
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 104, Revenue
Recognition, and other applicable revenue recognition
guidance and interpretations.
The Company records revenue when all four of the following
criteria are met: (i) there is persuasive evidence that an
arrangement exists; (ii) delivery of the products
and/or
services has occurred; (iii) the selling price is fixed or
determinable; and (iv) collection is reasonably assured.
Cash received in advance of revenue recognition is recorded as
deferred revenue.
Net revenues from System Solutions sales to end-users,
resellers, value-added resellers, and distributors are
recognized upon shipment of the product with the following
exceptions:
|
|
|
|
|
if a product is shipped
free-on-board
destination, revenue is recognized when the shipment is
delivered, or
|
|
|
|
if an acceptance or a contingency clause exists, revenue is
recognized upon the earlier of receipt of the acceptance letter
or when the clause lapses.
|
End-users, resellers, value-added resellers, and distributors
generally have no rights of return, stock rotation rights, or
price protection.
The Companys System Solutions sales include software that
is incidental to the electronic payment devices and services
included in its sales arrangements.
The Company enters into revenue arrangements for individual
products or services. As a System Solutions provider, the
Companys sales arrangements often include support services
in addition to electronic payment devices (multiple
deliverables). These services may include installation,
training, consulting, customer support, product maintenance,
and/or
refurbishment arrangements.
Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are evaluated to
determine if the deliverables (items) should be divided into
more than one unit of accounting. An item can generally be
considered a separate unit of accounting if all of the following
criteria are met:
|
|
|
|
|
the delivered item(s) has value to the customer on a standalone
basis;
|
|
|
|
there is objective and reliable evidence of the fair value of
the undelivered item(s); and
|
|
|
|
if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative
to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the
undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially in
the control of the Company.
|
Deliverables which do not meet these criteria are combined into
a single unit of accounting.
If there is objective and reliable evidence of fair value for
all units of accounting, the arrangement consideration is
allocated to the separate units of accounting based on their
relative fair values. In cases where there is objective and
reliable evidence of the fair value(s) of the undelivered
item(s) in an arrangement but no such evidence for one or more
of the delivered item(s), the residual method is used to
allocate the arrangement consideration. In cases in which there
is no objective and reliable evidence of the fair value(s) of
the undelivered item(s), the Company defers all revenues for the
arrangement until the period in which the last item is delivered.
For revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables, upon
shipment of its electronic payment devices, the Company defers
revenue for the aggregate fair value for all remaining
undelivered elements and recognizes the residual amount within
the arrangement as revenue for the delivered items as prescribed
in
EITF 00-21.
Fair value is determined based on the price charged when each
element is sold separately
and/or the
price charged by third parties for similar services.
Net revenues from services such as customer support and product
maintenance are initially deferred and then recognized on a
straight-line basis over the term of the contract. Net revenues
from services such as installations, equipment repairs,
refurbishment arrangements, training, and consulting are
recognized as the services are rendered.
76
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
For software development contracts, the Company recognizes
revenue using the completed contract method pursuant to
SOP 81-1.
During the period of performance of such contracts, billings and
costs are accumulated on the balance sheet, but no profit is
recorded before completion or substantial completion of the
work. The Company uses customers acceptance of such
products as the specific criteria to determine when such
contracts are substantially completed. Provisions for losses on
software development contracts are recorded in the period they
become evident.
For operating lease arrangements, the Company recognizes the
revenue ratably over the term of the lease.
In addition, the Company sells products to leasing companies
that, in turn, lease these products to end-users. In
transactions where the leasing companies have no recourse to the
Company in the event of default by the end-user, the Company
recognizes revenue at the point of shipment or point of
delivery, depending on the shipping terms and when all the other
revenue recognition criteria have been met. In arrangements
where the leasing companies have substantive recourse to the
Company in the event of default by the end-user, the Company
recognizes both the product revenue and the related cost of the
product as the payments are made to the leasing company by the
end-user, generally ratably over the lease term.
Segment
Reporting
The Company maintains two reportable segments, North America,
consisting of the United States and Canada, and International,
consisting of all other countries in which the Company makes
sales outside of the United States and Canada.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist of cash, money market funds,
and other highly liquid investments with maturities of three
months or less when purchased.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
Financial instruments consist principally of cash and cash
equivalents, marketable securities, accounts receivable,
accounts payable, long-term debt, foreign currency forward
contracts and interest rate caps. The estimated fair value of
cash, accounts receivable, and accounts payable approximates
their carrying value due to the short period of time to their
maturities. The estimated fair value of long-term debt related
to the Term B loan approximates its carrying value since the
rate of interest on the long-term debt adjusts to market rates
on a periodic basis. The fair value of the Companys
1.375% Senior Convertible Notes as of October 31, 2007
was $404.3 million based on the closing trading price at
that date. Cash equivalents, marketable securities, foreign
currency forward contracts, and interest rate caps are recorded
at fair value.
Marketable
Securities
The Company classifies its marketable securities as
available-for-sale in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 115,
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities. Available-for-sale securities are carried at
fair value, with unrealized holding gains and losses reported in
accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a separate
component of stockholders equity, net of tax, in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The amortization of
premiums and discounts on the investments and realized gains and
losses, determined by specific identification based on the trade
date of the transactions, are recorded in interest income in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. As of
October 31, 2007 and October 31, 2006, the Company had
no marketable securities.
Derivative
Financial Instruments
The Company uses foreign currency forward contracts to hedge
certain existing and anticipated foreign currency denominated
transactions. The terms of foreign currency forward contracts
used are generally consistent
77
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
with the timing of the foreign currency transactions. Under its
foreign currency risk management strategy, the Company utilizes
derivative instruments to protect its interests from
unanticipated fluctuations in earnings and cash flows caused by
volatility in currency exchange rates. This financial exposure
is monitored and managed by the Company as an integral part of
its overall risk management program which focuses on the
unpredictability of financial markets and seeks to reduce the
potentially adverse effects that the volatility of these markets
may have on its operating results. The Company has entered into
interest rate caps in order to manage its variable interest rate
risk on its secured credit facility.
The Company records certain derivatives, namely foreign currency
forward contracts, interest penalties on the Companys
1.375% Senior Convertible Notes, and interest rate caps, on
the balance sheet at fair value. Changes in the fair value of
derivatives that do not qualify or are not effective as hedges
are recognized currently in earnings. The Company does not use
derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading
purposes, nor does it hold or issue leveraged derivative
financial instruments.
The Company formally documents relationships between hedging
instruments and associated hedged items. This documentation
includes: identification of the specific foreign currency asset,
liability, or forecasted transaction being hedged; the nature of
the risk being hedged; the hedge objective; and the method of
assessing hedge effectiveness. Hedge effectiveness is formally
assessed, both at hedge inception and on an ongoing basis, to
determine whether the derivatives used in hedging transactions
are highly effective in offsetting changes in foreign currency
denominated assets, liabilities, and anticipated cash flows of
hedged items. When an anticipated transaction is no longer
likely to occur, the corresponding derivative instrument is
ineffective as a hedge, and changes in fair value of the
instrument are recognized in net income.
The Companys international sales are generally denominated
in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. For sales in
currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the volatility of
the foreign currency markets represents risk to the
Companys profit margins. The Company defines its exposure
as the risk of changes in the functional-currency-equivalent
cash flows (generally U.S. dollars) attributable to changes
in the related foreign currency exchange rates. From time to
time the Company enters into certain foreign currency forward
contracts with terms designed to substantially match those of
the underlying exposure. The Company does not qualify these
foreign currency forward contracts as hedging instruments and,
as such, records the changes in the fair value of these
derivatives immediately in other expense, net in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. As of
October 31, 2007 and October 31, 2006, the Company did
not have any outstanding foreign currency forward contracts. On
November 1, 2007, the Company entered into foreign currency
forward contracts with aggregate notional amounts of
$40.2 million to hedge exposures to non-functional
currencies. The Companys foreign currency forward
contracts have maturities of 95 days or less.
The Company is exposed to interest rate risk related to a
portion of its debt, which bears interest based upon the
three-month LIBOR rate. On October 31, 2006, the
Companys principal subsidiary, VeriFone, Inc., entered
into a credit agreement with a syndicate of financial
institutions, led by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and
Lehman Commercial Paper Inc. (the Credit Facility).
The Credit Facility consists of a Term B Loan facility of
$500.0 million and a revolving credit facility permitting
borrowings of up to $40.0 million. The proceeds from the
Term B loan were used to repay all outstanding amounts relating
to the Old Credit Facility, pay certain transaction costs, and
partially fund the cash consideration in connection with the
acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006. Through
October 31, 2007, the Company repaid an aggregate of
$263.8 million, leaving a Term B Loan balance of
$236.2 million at October 31, 2007. Under the Credit
Facility, the Company is required to fix the interest rate
through swaps, rate caps, collars, and similar agreements with
respect to at least 30.0% of the outstanding principal amount of
all loans and other indebtedness that have floating interest
rates.
In May and December 2006, the Company purchased two-year
interest rate caps for a total premium of $118,000. The interest
rate caps have an initial notional amount of $200.0 million
declining to $150.0 million after one year under which the
Company will receive interest payments if the three-month LIBOR
rate exceeds 6.5%. The interest rate caps were purchased to fix
the interest rate related to the existing secured credit
facility, or any
78
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
refinancing thereof which is explained in Note 5. The fair
value of the interest rate caps as of October 31, 2007 was
$308 which was recorded in prepaid expenses and other current
assets in the consolidated balance sheets, with the related
$104,000 unrealized loss recorded as a component of accumulated
other comprehensive income, net of a $41,000 tax benefit. For
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, the Company
received no payments from these interest rate caps as the
three-month LIBOR did not exceed 6.5%.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, the Company
received interest of $269,000 from two interest rate caps that
expired in March and July 2006, as a result of the three-month
LIBOR rate on its Term B Loan exceeding 5.0% and 4.0%,
respectively. This amount was recorded as an offset to interest
expense in the consolidated statements of operations. For the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2005, the Company did not
receive any interest payment, as the three-month LIBOR during
that period remained under 4.0%.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of standard cost or market.
Standard costs approximate actual costs under the
first-in,
first-out (FIFO) method. The Company regularly
monitors inventory quantities on hand and records write-downs
for excess and obsolete inventories based primarily on the
Companys estimated forecast of product demand and
production requirements. Such write-downs establish a new
cost-basis of accounting for the related inventory. Actual
inventory losses may differ from managements estimates.
Property,
Plant, and Equipment, net
Property, plant, and equipment are stated at cost, net of
accumulated depreciation and amortization. Property, plant, and
equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the
estimated useful lives of the assets, generally two to ten
years, except buildings which are depreciated over
40 years. The cost of equipment under capital leases is
recorded at the lower of the present value of the minimum lease
payments or the fair value of the assets and is amortized on a
straight-line basis over the shorter of the term of the related
lease or the estimated useful life of the asset. Amortization of
assets under capital leases is included with depreciation
expense.
Research
and Development Costs
Research and development costs are generally expensed as
incurred. Costs eligible for capitalization under
SFAS No. 86, Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software to be Sold, Leased, or Otherwise Marketed, were
$7.7 million, $2.0 million, and $0.9 million for
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005,
respectively. Capitalized software development costs of
$15.2 million and $7.5 million at October 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively, are being amortized on a
straight-line basis over the estimated life of the product to
which the costs relate, ranging from three to five years. These
costs, net of accumulated amortization of $4.4 million and
$3.2 million as of October 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively, are recorded in other assets in the consolidated
balance sheets.
Goodwill
and Purchased Intangible Assets
Goodwill and purchased intangible assets have been recorded as a
result of the Companys acquisitions. Goodwill is not
amortized for accounting purposes. Purchased intangible assets
are amortized over their estimated useful lives, generally one
and one-half to seven years.
The Company is required to perform an annual impairment test of
goodwill. Should certain events or indicators of impairment
occur between annual impairment tests, the Company would perform
the impairment test of goodwill when those events or indicators
occurred. In the first step of the analysis, the Companys
assets and liabilities, including existing goodwill and other
intangible assets, are assigned to the identified reporting
units to determine the carrying value of the reporting units.
Based on how the business is managed, the Company has five
reporting units. Goodwill is allocated to each reporting unit
based on its relative contribution to the Companys
operating
79
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
results. If the carrying value of a reporting unit is in excess
of its fair value, an impairment may exist, and the Company must
perform the second step of the analysis, in which the implied
fair value of the goodwill is compared to its carrying value to
determine the impairment charge, if any.
The fair value of the reporting units is determined using the
income approach. The income approach focuses on the
income-producing capability of an asset, measuring the current
value of the asset by calculating the present value of its
future economic benefits such as cash earnings, cost savings,
tax deductions, and proceeds from disposition. Value indications
are developed by discounting expected cash flows to their
present value at a rate of return that incorporates the
risk-free rate for the use of funds, the expected rate of
inflation, and risks associated with the particular investment.
No impairment charges have been recorded for the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005.
Accounting
for Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
The Company periodically evaluates whether changes have occurred
that would require revision of the remaining useful life of
property, plant, and equipment and purchased intangible assets
or render them not recoverable. If such circumstances arise, the
Company uses an estimate of the undiscounted value of expected
future operating cash flows to determine whether the long-lived
assets are impaired. If the aggregate undiscounted cash flows
are less than the carrying value of the assets, the resulting
impairment charge to be recorded is calculated based on the
excess of the carrying value of the assets over the fair value
of such assets, with the fair value determined based on an
estimate of discounted future cash flows. For the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, no impairment
charges have been recorded.
Debt
Issuance Costs
Debt issuance costs are stated at cost, net of accumulated
amortization. Amortization expense is calculated using the
effective interest method and is recorded in interest expense in
the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. During
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, the Company
recorded a $4.8 million
write-off of
debt issuance costs related to the portion of the Credit
Facility which was repaid.
Income
Taxes
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
expected tax consequences of temporary differences between the
tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts
using enacted tax rates in effect for the year the differences
are expected to reverse. The recording of deferred tax assets
depends on the ability to generate current and future taxable
income in the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions.
Each period the Company evaluates the need for a valuation
allowance and adjusts it if sufficient positive evidence exists
to reverse existing valuation allowances. The Company records a
valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount
that is expected to be realized on a more likely than not basis.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, which clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement
attribute for the financial statement recognition and
measurement of a tax position. FIN 48 indicates that an
enterprise shall initially recognize the financial statement
effects of a tax position when it is more likely than not of
being sustained on examination, based on the technical merits of
the position. In addition, FIN 48 indicates that the
measurement of a tax position that meets the more likely than
not threshold shall consider the amounts and probabilities of
the outcomes that could be realized upon ultimate settlement.
This interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006 and interim periods within those
fiscal years. The Company has adopted FIN 48 as of
November 1, 2007, as required. Upon initial adoption, the
Company expects the impact on its financial position and results
of operations to be an increase in tax liabilities of
approximately $3.3 million. This will be reported as a
$1.4 million decrease to the opening balance of retained
earnings, an
80
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
increase to the non-current deferred tax assets of
$0.5 million, and a $1.4 million increase to goodwill.
There will also be a reclassification of $17.7 million from
current taxes payable to non-current taxes payable as of the
date of adoption. The Company expects an increase in the
effective income tax rate in future years along with greater
volatility in the effective tax rate due to the adoption of
FIN 48.
Net
Income (Loss) Per Share
Basic net income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing
income (loss) attributable to common stockholders by the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the
period, less the weighted average number of common shares
subject to repurchase. Diluted net income (loss) per common
share is computed using the weighted average number of common
shares outstanding plus the effect of common stock equivalents,
unless the common stock equivalents are anti-dilutive. The
potential dilutive shares of the Companys common stock
resulting from the assumed exercise of outstanding stock options
and equivalents and the assumed exercise of the warrants
relating to the senior convertible notes and the dilutive effect
of the senior convertible notes are determined under the
treasury stock method.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Prior to May 1, 2005, the Company accounted for stock-based
employee compensation plans under the intrinsic value
recognition and measurement provisions of Accounting Principles
Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees and related Interpretations as
permitted by SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation. The intrinsic value of stock-based
compensation expense recorded by the Company was
$0.1 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2005.
Effective May 1, 2005, the Company adopted the fair value
recognition and measurement provisions of
SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment.
SFAS No. 123(R) is applicable for stock-based
awards exchanged for employee services and in certain
circumstances for non-employee directors. Pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), stock-based compensation cost is
measured at the grant date, based on the fair value of the
award, and is recognized as expense over the requisite service
period. The Company elected to adopt the
modified-prospective-transition method, as provided by
SFAS No. 123(R). Accordingly, prior period amounts
have not been restated. Under this transition method, the
Company is required to record compensation expense for all
awards granted after the date of adoption using the grant-date
fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of
SFAS No. 123(R) and for the unvested portion of
previously granted awards as of May 1, 2005 using the
grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS No. 123.
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company
presented all tax benefits of deductions resulting from the
exercise of stock options as operating cash flows in the
accompanying consolidated statements of cash flows.
SFAS No. 123(R) requires the cash flows resulting from
the tax benefits due to tax deductions in excess of the
compensation cost recognized for those options (excess tax
benefits) to be classified as financing cash flows.
Pro forma information regarding net income and net income per
share has been determined as if the Company had applied the fair
value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to
options granted under the Companys stock option plans in
all periods presented prior to the Companys adopting
SFAS No. 123(R) on May 1, 2005. The fair
81
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
value of each stock option was estimated on the date of grant
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following
assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Expected term of the options
|
|
4 years
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
4.3%
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
|
58%
|
Expected dividend rate
|
|
0%
|
For purposes of pro forma disclosures, the estimated fair value
of the options is amortized to expense over the options
vesting periods using the straight-line method. The
Companys pro forma information is as follows (in
thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income as reported
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
Plus: stock-based employee compensation expense included in
reported net income
|
|
|
1,687
|
|
Less: total stock-based employee compensation expense determined
under fair value based method for all awards
|
|
|
(1,935
|
)
|
Plus: tax benefit effect of the compensation difference
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income pro forma
|
|
$
|
33,088
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income per common share as reported
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
Basic net income per common share pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
Diluted net income per common share as reported
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
Diluted net income per common share pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
Restructuring
In conjunction with certain business combinations, the Company
records restructuring liabilities of the acquired company in
accordance with EITF Issue
No. 95-3,
Recognition of Liabilities in Connection with a Purchase
Business Combination. These costs represent liabilities that
are recorded as part of the purchase price allocation. Other
restructuring costs are accounted for under
SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with
Exit or Disposal Activities. In recording severance
reserves, the Company accrues a liability when all of the
following conditions have been met: management, having the
authority to approve the action, commits to a plan of
termination; the plan identifies the number of employees to be
terminated, their job classifications and their locations, and
the expected completion date; the plan is communicated such that
the terms of the benefit arrangement are presented in sufficient
detail to enable employees to determine the type and amount of
benefits they will receive if they are involuntarily terminated;
and actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is
unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or
that the plan will be withdrawn. In recording facilities lease
loss reserves, the Company makes various assumptions, including
the time period over which the facilities are expected to be
vacant, expected sublease terms, expected sublease rates,
anticipated future operating expenses and expected future use of
the facilities.
Severance
Pay
The Companys liability for severance pay to its Israeli
employees is calculated pursuant to Israeli severance pay law
based on the most recent salary of the employee multiplied by
the number of years of employment of such employee as of the
applicable balance sheet date. Employees are entitled to one
months salary for each year of
82
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
employment, or a pro-rata portion thereof. The Company funds the
liability by monthly deposits in insurance policies and
severance pay funds. Severance pay expense totaled approximately
$1.4 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007.
Warranty
Costs
The Company accrues for estimated warranty obligations when
revenue is recognized based on an estimate of future warranty
costs for delivered products. Such estimates are based on
historical experience and expectations of future costs. The
Company periodically evaluates and adjusts the accrued warranty
costs to the extent actual warranty costs vary from the original
estimates. The Companys warranty period typically extends
from 13 months to five years from the date of shipment.
Costs associated with maintenance contracts, including extended
warranty contracts, are expensed when they are incurred. Actual
warranty costs may differ from managements estimates.
Shipping
and Handling Costs
Shipping and handling costs incurred for delivery to customers
are expensed as incurred and are included in cost of net
revenues in the accompanying consolidated statements of
operations. In those instances where the Company bills shipping
and handling costs to customers, the amounts billed are
classified as revenue.
Advertising
Costs
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred and totaled
approximately $1.4 million, $0.3 million, and
$0.2 million for the fiscal years ended October 31,
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
Concentrations
of Credit Risk
Cash is placed on deposit in major financial institutions in the
United States and other countries. Such deposits may be in
excess of insured limits. Management believes that the financial
institutions that hold the Companys cash are financially
sound and, accordingly, minimal credit risk exists with respect
to these balances.
The Company invests cash not required for use in operations in
high credit quality securities based on its investment policy.
The investment policy has limits based on credit quality,
investment concentration, investment type, and maturity that the
Company believes will result in reduced risk of loss of capital.
Investments are of a short-term nature and include investments
in money market funds and corporate debt securities.
The Company has not experienced any investment losses due to
institutional failure or bankruptcy.
The Companys accounts receivable are derived from sales to
a large number of direct customers, resellers, and distributors
in the Americas, Europe, and the Asia Pacific region. The
Company performs ongoing evaluations of its customers
financial condition and limits the amount of credit extended
when deemed necessary, but generally requires no collateral.
An allowance for doubtful accounts is established with respect
to those amounts that the Company has determined to be doubtful
of collection using specific identification of doubtful accounts
and an aging of receivables analysis based on invoice due dates.
Actual collection losses may differ from managements
estimates, and such differences could be material to the
Companys consolidated financial position, results of
operations, and cash flows. Uncollectible receivables are
written off against the allowance for doubtful accounts when all
efforts to collect them have been exhausted and recoveries are
recognized when they are received. Generally, accounts
receivable are past due 30 days after the invoice date
unless special payment terms are provided.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, no customer
accounted for more than 10% of net revenues. For the fiscal
years ended October 31, 2006 and 2005, one customer, First
Data Corporation and its affiliates, accounted for 13% and 12%,
respectively, of net revenues which were included in both North
America and International segments. At October 31, 2007, no
customer accounted for more than 10% of accounts receivable. At
October 31,
83
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2006, First Data Corporation and its affiliates accounted for
13% of accounts receivable. No other customer accounted for 10%
or more of accounts receivable at October 31, 2006.
The Company is exposed to credit loss in the event of
nonperformance by counterparties to the foreign currency forward
contracts used to mitigate the effect of exchange rate changes,
the interest rate caps used to mitigate the effect of interest
rate changes, and the purchased call option for the
Companys stock related to the senior convertible notes.
These counterparties are large international financial
institutions and to date, no such counterparty has failed to
meet its financial obligations to the Company. The Company does
not anticipate nonperformance by these counterparties.
Equity
Investments and Minority Interests
The Company holds minority investments in several companies.
These investments are accounted for under the equity method if
the Company can exert significant influence on the investee
company or under the cost method if the Company does not have
significant influence over the investee company. The investments
are included in other assets in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets. Gains and losses recorded for equity method
investments are included in other expense, net in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The Company
periodically monitors its investments for impairment and will
record a reduction in the carrying value, if and when necessary.
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Comprehensive income (loss) consists of net income (loss) and
other comprehensive income (loss). Other comprehensive income
(loss) includes certain changes in equity that are excluded from
results of operations. Specifically, foreign currency
translation adjustments, changes in the fair value of
derivatives designated as hedges, and unrealized gains and
losses on available-for-sale marketable securities are included
in accumulated other comprehensive income in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
APB 14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement). FSP APB
14-1
requires the issuer of convertible debt instruments with cash
settlement features to account separately for the liability and
equity components of the instrument. The debt would be
recognized at the present value of its cash flows discounted
using the issuers nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at
the time of issuance. The equity component would be recognized
as the difference between the proceeds from the issuance of the
note and the fair value of the liability. The FSP also requires
accretion of the resultant debt discount over the expected life
of the debt. The FSP is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those
years. Entities are required to apply the FSP retrospectively
for all periods presented. The Company is currently evaluating
FSP APB 14-1
and has not yet determined the impact its adoption will have on
the Companys consolidated financial statements. However,
the impact of this new accounting treatment will be significant
and will result in a significant increase to non-cash interest
expense beginning in fiscal year 2010 for financial statements
covering past and future periods.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51.
SFAS No. 160 will change the accounting and
reporting for minority interests, which will be recharacterized
as noncontrolling interests (NCI) and classified as
a component of equity. In conjunction with
SFAS No. 141(R), discussed below,
SFAS No. 160 will significantly change the accounting
for partial
and/or step
acquisitions. SFAS No. 160 will be effective for the
Company in the first quarter of fiscal year 2010. Early adoption
is not permitted. The Company is currently evaluating
SFAS No. 160 and has not yet determined the impact, if
any, its adoption will have on the Companys consolidated
financial statements.
84
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations. SFAS No. 141(R) changes
the accounting for business combinations including the
measurement of acquirer shares issued in consideration for a
business combination, the recognition of contingent
consideration, the accounting for pre-acquisition gain and loss
contingencies, the recognition of capitalized in-process
research and development as an indefinite-lived intangible asset
until approved or discontinued rather than as an immediate
expense, expensing restructuring costs in connection with an
acquisition rather than adding them to the cost of an
acquisition, the treatment of acquisition-related transaction
costs, the recognition of changes in the acquirers income
tax valuation allowance, and accounting for partial
and/or step
acquisitions. SFAS No. 141(R) is effective on a
prospective basis for all business combinations for which the
acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first
annual period subsequent to December 15, 2008, with the
exception of the accounting for valuation allowances on deferred
taxes and acquired tax contingencies under
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
Early adoption is not permitted. When SFAS No. 141(R)
becomes effective, which for the Company will be in the first
quarter of fiscal 2010, any adjustments made to valuation
allowances on deferred taxes and acquired tax contingencies
associated with acquisitions that closed prior to the effective
date of SFAS No. 141(R) will be recorded through
income tax expense, whereas currently the accounting treatment
would require any adjustment to be recognized through the
purchase price. The Company is currently evaluating
SFAS No. 141(R) and has not yet determined the impact,
if any, its adoption will have on the Companys
consolidated financial statements.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities. SFAS No. 159 permits entities to
elect to measure financial assets and liabilities at fair value.
The objective of the guidance is to improve financial reporting
by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate
volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring related
assets and liabilities differently, without having to apply
complex hedge accounting provisions. SFAS No. 159 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years, provided the
provisions of SFAS No. 157 are applied. The Company is
evaluating SFAS No. 159 and has not yet determined the
impact, if any, its adoption it will have on the Companys
consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157 defines
fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS No. 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements but rather eliminates inconsistencies in guidance
found in various prior accounting pronouncements. On
February 12, 2008 the FASB issued FASB Staff Position
(FSP)
FAS 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157. FSP
FAS 157-2
defers the implementation of SFAS No. 157 for certain
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities. The remainder
of SFAS No. 157 is effective for the Company beginning
in the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. The aspects that have
been deferred by FSP
FAS 157-2
will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter
of fiscal year 2010. The implementation of
SFAS No. 157 is not expected to have a material impact
on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(FIN 48), Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109, which clarifies the accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes recognized in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes.
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement
attribute for the financial statement recognition and
measurement of a tax position. FIN 48 indicates that an
enterprise shall initially recognize the financial statement
effects of a tax position when it is more likely than not of
being sustained on examination, based on the technical merits of
the position. In addition, FIN 48 indicates that the
measurement of a tax position that meets the more likely than
not threshold shall consider the amounts and probabilities of
the outcomes that could be realized upon ultimate settlement.
This interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006 and interim periods within those
fiscal years. The Company has adopted FIN 48 as of
November 1, 2007, as required. Upon initial adoption, the
Company expects the impact on its financial position and results
of operations to be an increase in tax liabilities of
approximately $3.3 million. This will be reported as a
$1.4 million decrease to the opening balance of retained
earnings, an increase to the non-current deferred tax assets of
$0.5 million, and a $1.4 million increase to goodwill.
There will
85
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
also be a reclassification of $17.7 million from current
taxes payable to non-current taxes payable as of the date of
adoption. The Company expects an increase in the effective
income tax rate in future years along with greater volatility in
the effective tax rate due to the adoption of FIN 48.
|
|
Note 3.
|
Business
Combinations
|
Fiscal
Year 2007 Acquisitions
Lipman
Electronic Engineering Ltd. (Lipman)
On November 1, 2006, the Company acquired all of the
outstanding common stock of Lipman. The Company acquired Lipman
to enhance the Companys ability to reach certain of its
strategic and business objectives, which include
(i) extending the Companys product and service
offerings to include Lipmans products, (ii) enabling
the Company to leverage its distribution channels, international
presence, customer base, and brand recognition to accelerate
Lipmans market penetration and growth, (iii) enabling
the Company to enhance its position in areas where the Company
is already strong by offering complementary products and
services developed by Lipman, (iv) enhancing its product
offerings in a variety of its core product areas, and
(v) enhancing the Companys manufacturing capacity.
The consideration paid to acquire Lipman was $347.4 million
in cash, 13,462,474 shares of common stock of the Company,
and assumption of all outstanding Lipman stock options. To fund
a portion of the cash consideration, the Company used
$307.2 million of the Term B Loan proceeds under its Credit
Facility on November 1, 2006. See
Note 5 Financing for additional
information related to the Credit Facility.
The purchase price is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$
|
347,350
|
|
Value of common stock issued
|
|
|
417,606
|
|
Value of Lipman vested and unvested options assumed
|
|
|
38,008
|
|
Transaction costs and expenses
|
|
|
15,686
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-total
|
|
|
818,650
|
|
Less: Value of unvested Lipman options assumed
|
|
|
(19,356
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
799,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pursuant to the proration and allocation provisions of the
merger agreement, the total merger consideration consisted of
(i) a number of shares of the Companys common stock
equal to the product of 0.50 multiplied by the number of Lipman
ordinary shares issued and outstanding on the closing date and
(ii) an amount in cash equal to the product of $12.804
multiplied by the number of Lipman ordinary shares issued and
outstanding on the closing date, as reduced by the aggregate
amount of the special cash dividend paid by Lipman prior to the
merger. The Company issued 13,462,474 shares of common
stock and paid $344.7 million in cash (excluding the
aggregate amount of the special cash dividend) on the closing
date. The Company subsequently paid an additional
$2.6 million in cash to acquire the remaining minority
interest of Lipmans Chinese subsidiary.
The 13,462,474 shares have been valued at $31.02 per share
based on an average of the closing prices of the Companys
common stock for a range of trading days two days before
April 10, 2006, the announcement date of the proposed
merger, the announcement date, and two days after the
announcement date.
Pursuant to the merger agreement, the Company assumed, generally
on a one-for-one basis, all Lipman share options outstanding at
closing. The Company assumed options to purchase approximately
3,375,527 shares of Lipman ordinary shares at a weighted
average exercise price of $24.47. The fair value of the
outstanding vested and unvested options of $38.0 million
was determined using a Black-Scholes valuation model using the
following
86
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
weighted-average assumptions: stock price of $31.02 per share
(determined as described above), expected term of
2.5 years, expected volatility of 41%, and risk free
interest rate of 4.7%.
For accounting purposes the fair value of unvested options as of
the closing date is considered unrecognized share-based
compensation and is deducted in determining the purchase price.
This unrecognized share-based compensation is being recognized
as compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the
estimated remaining service period of 2.8 years. The fair
value of the outstanding unvested options of $19.4 million
was determined using a Black-Scholes valuation model using the
assumptions noted above, except that the stock price on the
closing date of $30.00 per share was used, as required, instead
of the average price around the announcement date of $31.02 per
share. The Company determined the number of unvested options
based on the ratio of the number of months of service remaining
to be provided by employees as of November 1, 2006 to the
total vesting period for the options.
Under the purchase method of accounting, the total purchase
price as shown in the table above is allocated to Lipmans
tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed
as well as in-process research and development based on their
estimated fair values as of the closing date. The excess of the
purchase price over the net tangible and intangible assets is
recorded as goodwill.
The purchase price is allocated as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$
|
95,931
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
33,201
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
65,315
|
|
Property, plant, and equipment, net
|
|
|
18,603
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
12,778
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
(8,890
|
)
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
(93,073
|
)
|
Net deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(60,345
|
)
|
Non current liabilities
|
|
|
(7,933
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net tangible assets
|
|
|
55,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizable intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Developed and core technology
|
|
|
135,690
|
|
Customer backlog
|
|
|
110
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
66,250
|
|
Internal use software
|
|
|
3,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
205,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
6,752
|
|
Excess over fair value of vested options
|
|
|
1,030
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
530,425
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price allocation
|
|
$
|
799,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Tangible Assets
Of the total purchase price, approximately $55.6 million
has been allocated to net tangible assets acquired. Except for
inventory, property, plant, and equipment, deferred revenue,
accrued liabilities, and deferred taxes, the Company has valued
net tangible assets at their respective carrying amounts as of
November 1, 2006, as the Company believes these amounts
approximate their current fair value.
87
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company increased Lipmans historical value of
inventory by $13.9 million to adjust inventory to an amount
equivalent to the selling price less an appropriate profit
margin. The Company reduced Lipmans historical value of
deferred revenue by $3.6 million to adjust deferred revenue
to an amount equivalent to the estimated cost plus an
appropriate profit margin to perform the services related to
Lipmans service contracts. The Company reduced
Lipmans historical net book value of property, plant, and
equipment by $1.4 million to adjust property, plant, and
equipment to estimated fair value.
The Company has identified and recorded provisions related to
certain pre-acquisition contingencies of $22.3 million
related to liabilities that are probable and reasonably
estimable.
Pursuant to a detailed restructuring plan, the Company accrued
$6.6 million of costs for severance, costs of vacating
facilities, and costs to exit or terminate other duplicative
activities in accordance with the requirements of
EITF 95-3,
Recognition of Liabilities in Connection with a Purchase
Business Combination (see Note 8).
Certain deferred tax liabilities have been recorded based upon
conclusions regarding the tax positions expected to be taken.
Included in the amounts recorded is a foreign deferred tax
liability of approximately $32.8 million recorded in
connection with undistributed pre-acquisition foreign earnings
subject to an approved enterprise status in Israel.
Intangible
Assets
Developed and core technology, which comprises products that
have reached technological feasibility, includes products in
Lipmans product lines, principally the NURIT product line.
Lipmans technology and products are designed for hardware,
software, solutions, and services, serving the point of sale
market internationally. This proprietary know-how can be
leveraged by the Company to develop new technology and improved
products and manufacturing processes. The Company expects to
amortize the developed and core technology over estimated lives
of 18 months to 7 years.
Customer relationships represent the distribution channels
through which Lipman sells the majority of its products and
services. The Company expects to amortize the fair value of
these assets over estimated lives of 4 to 6 years.
Internal use software represents the internal use software
assets which have been developed internally but have not
previously been capitalized. The Company expects to amortize the
fair value of these assets over estimated lives of 5 to
7 years.
The fair value of intangible assets was based on a valuation
using an income approach, as well as discussions with Lipman
management and a review of certain transaction-related documents
and forecasts prepared by the Company and Lipman management. The
rate utilized to discount net cash flows to their present values
is 13%. The discount rate was determined after consideration of
the Companys weighted average cost of capital specific to
this transaction.
Estimated useful lives for the intangible assets were based on
historical experience with technology life cycles, product
roadmaps, branding strategy, historical and projected
maintenance renewal rates, historical treatment of the
Companys acquisition-related intangible assets, and the
Companys intended future use of the intangible assets.
In-Process
Research and Development
Of the total purchase price, $6.8 million was allocated to
in-process research and development and was charged to expense
during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. In-process
research and development represents incomplete Lipman research
and development projects that had not reached technological
feasibility and had no alternative future use. Lipman was
developing new products that qualify as in-process research and
development in multiple product areas. Lipmans research
and development projects were focused on developing new
products, integrating new technologies, improving product
performance, and broadening features and functionalities. The
88
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
principal research and development efforts of Lipman are related
primarily to three products. There is a risk that these
developments and enhancements will not be competitive with other
products using alternative technologies that offer comparable
functionality.
The value assigned to in-process research and development was
determined by considering the importance of each project to the
overall development plan, estimating costs to develop the
purchased in-process research and development into commercially
viable products, estimating the resulting net cash flows from
the projects when completed, and discounting the net cash flows
to their present value. The revenue estimates used to value the
purchased in-process research and development were based on
estimates of relevant market sizes and growth factors, expected
trends in technology, and the nature and expected timing of new
product introductions by Lipman and its competitors.
The rates utilized to discount the net cash flows to their
present value were based on the Companys weighted average
cost of capital. The weighted average cost of capital was
adjusted to reflect the difficulties and uncertainties in
completing each project and thereby achieving technological
feasibility, the percentage of completion of each project,
anticipated market acceptance and penetration, market growth
rates, and risks related to the impact of potential changes in
future target markets. Based on these factors, a discount rate
of 19% was deemed appropriate for valuing the in-process
research and development.
Excess
Over Fair Value of Vested Options
The Company assumed Lipman options to purchase shares based
generally on a one-for-one exchange ratio, which differed from
the all-stock exchange ratio of 0.9336 (the all-stock
consideration exchange ratio of 0.9844 as reduced by the per
share value of the $1.50 per share special cash dividend) for
Lipman ordinary shares. As a result, the Company recognized
$1.0 million of share-based compensation for the excess
over fair value of vested options in the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007.
Goodwill
Of the total purchase price, approximately $530.4 million
was allocated to goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of the
purchase price of an acquired business over the fair value of
the underlying net tangible and intangible assets, in-process
research and development, and excess over fair value of vested
options. Goodwill arose because of Lipmans ability to help
the Company reach certain of its strategic and business
objectives. Goodwill will not be amortized but instead will be
tested for impairment at least annually (more frequently if
certain indicators are present). In the event that the
management of the combined company determines that the value of
goodwill has become impaired, the combined company will incur an
accounting charge for the amount of impairment during the fiscal
quarter in which the determination is made. The goodwill has
been allocated $523.9 million to the International segment
and $6.5 million to the North America segment. Most of the
goodwill is expected to be deductible for income tax purposes.
The results of operations of Lipman are included in the
Companys consolidated financial statements from November
2006. The following table presents unaudited pro forma results
of operations and gives effect to the acquisition of Lipman as
if the acquisition had been consummated at the beginning of
fiscal year 2006. The unaudited pro forma results of operations
are not necessarily indicative of what would have occurred had
the acquisition been made as of the beginning of the period or
of the results that may occur in the future. Net income includes
the write-off of acquired in-process research and development of
$6.8 million, additional interest expense of
$23.1 million, deferred revenue step down of
$3.7 million, fair value step up of inventory of
$13.9 million, stock-based compensation for the excess fair
value on vested options of $1.0 million, and amortization
of intangible assets
89
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
related to the acquisition of $49.2 million for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2006. The unaudited pro forma
information is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
$
|
831.1
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
19.8
|
|
Net income per share basic
|
|
$
|
0.25
|
|
Net income per share diluted
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
The pro forma amounts above were compiled using the twelve-month
period ended September 30, 2006 for Lipman and the
twelve-month period ended October 31, 2006 for VeriFone.
VeriFone
Transportation Systems, Inc.
In February 2007, the Company made an additional cash investment
of $4.0 million in VeriFone Transportation Systems, Inc.
(VTS) to increase its ownership percentage to 51%.
The total purchase price of $5.4 million, including the
original investment of $1.2 million and $0.2 million
of transactions costs, was allocated to the net assets of VTS as
follows: $3.4 million to goodwill; $4.6 million to
intangible assets, comprised of customer relationships of
$3.8 million and internal use software of
$0.8 million; $0.9 million to net tangible liabilities
acquired; and $1.7 million to minority interest. All of the
goodwill has been allocated to the North America segment. In May
2007, the Company made an additional investment of
$5.0 million in VTS to increase its ownership percentage
from 51.0% to 63.2%. In addition, the Company has provided VTS
with working capital loans totaling $5.2 million. In July
2007, VTS issued capital stock to a third party, reducing the
Companys equity interest in VTS from 63.2% to 60.1%. Pro
forma financial information is not provided as VTS results
of operations are not material to the Companys results of
operations.
Fiscal
Year 2006 Acquisition
PayWare
On September 1, 2006, the Company acquired PayWare, the
payment systems business of Trintech Group PLC for approximately
$10.7 million, comprised of $9.6 million in cash
consideration and $1.1 million of transaction costs. The
cash consideration includes $2.0 million that has been
placed in an escrow account pending resolution of certain items.
The Company acquired PayWare to broaden the Companys EMEA
presence at the point of sale beyond its core solutions. The
Companys consolidated financial statements include the
operating results of the business acquired from the date of
acquisition. Pro forma results of operations have not been
presented because the effect of the acquisition was not
material. This transaction was accounted for using the purchase
method of accounting.
The total purchase price of $10.7 million was allocated as
follows: $12.4 million to goodwill (not deductible for
income tax purposes); $7.7 million to intangible assets,
comprised of developed technology of $3.0 million, backlog
of $1.4 million, and customer relationships of
$3.3 million; and $9.4 million to net tangible
liabilities assumed. The estimated economic useful lives of the
identifiable intangible assets acquired are 3 to 5 years
for the developed technology, one year for backlog, and 4 to
6 years for the customer relationships. The weighted
average amortization period for developed technology and
customer relationships was 3.7 years. All of the goodwill
has been allocated to the International segment.
90
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Fiscal
Year 2005 Acquisition
GO
Software
On March 1, 2005, the Company acquired the assets of the GO
Software business from Return on Investment Corporation for
approximately $13.4 million in consideration, consisting of
cash and transaction costs. The Company paid $13.0 million
in cash and could have paid up to $2.0 million in
contingent consideration, based on the future business
performance of GO Software through June 2006. No contingent
payments were required. GO Software provides PC-based point
of sale payment processing software to more than 150,000
businesses. The Company acquired the assets of GO Software to
broaden the Companys presence at the point of sale beyond
its core solutions. The Companys consolidated financial
statements include the operating results of the business
acquired from the date of acquisition. Pro forma results of
operations have not been presented because the effect of the
acquisition was not material. This transaction was accounted for
using the purchase method of accounting.
The total purchase price of $13.4 million was allocated to
our North America segment as follows: $4.7 million to
goodwill (amortizable and deductible for income tax purposes);
$8.6 million to intangible assets, comprised of developed
technology of $4.5 million and customer relationships of
$4.1 million; and $0.1 million to net tangible assets
acquired. With respect to the GO Software acquisition, the
weighted average amortization period for developed technology
and customer relationships was 2.5 years. The Company
accrued in the purchase price allocation $313,000 of
restructuring costs related to the integration of GO
Softwares Savannah helpdesk facility with the
Companys helpdesk facility in Clearwater, Florida.
|
|
Note 4.
|
Balance
Sheet and Statement of Operations Details
|
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts
Activity related to the allowance for doubtful accounts
consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charges to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
Deductions,
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
of Year
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Write-offs
|
|
|
End of Year
|
|
|
Year ended October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
2,364
|
|
|
$
|
2,654
|
|
|
$
|
(748
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,270
|
|
Year ended October 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
1,571
|
|
|
$
|
1,623
|
|
|
$
|
(830
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,364
|
|
Year ended October 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
2,868
|
|
|
$
|
(675
|
)
|
|
$
|
(622
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,571
|
|
Inventories
Inventories consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Raw materials
|
|
$
|
29,548
|
|
|
$
|
4,095
|
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
3,849
|
|
|
|
808
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
73,771
|
|
|
|
81,728
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
107,168
|
|
|
$
|
86,631
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Prepaid
Expenses and Other Current Assets
Prepaid expenses and other current assets consisted of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Prepaid taxes
|
|
$
|
38,390
|
|
|
$
|
5,241
|
|
Other prepaid expenses
|
|
|
15,266
|
|
|
|
3,208
|
|
Other receivables
|
|
|
7,827
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
1,930
|
|
|
|
3,744
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
63,413
|
|
|
$
|
12,943
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
Plant, and Equipment, net
Property, plant, and equipment consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Computer hardware and software
|
|
$
|
13,519
|
|
|
$
|
7,049
|
|
Office equipment, furniture, and fixtures
|
|
|
4,288
|
|
|
|
3,972
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
10,579
|
|
|
|
5,602
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
11,061
|
|
|
|
3,897
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
18,532
|
|
|
|
966
|
|
Land
|
|
|
1,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
4,832
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
64,444
|
|
|
|
21,486
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(16,151
|
)
|
|
|
(14,186
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant, and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
48,293
|
|
|
$
|
7,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in construction in progress during the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007 was $17.6 million. This
increase was primarily attributable to the Companys
migration to a new enterprise resource planning information
system, which will replace certain of the Companys
existing systems in fiscal year 2008.
In accordance with Statement of Position
98-1,
Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use, the Company capitalizes certain
costs associated with the development of internal use software.
These assets are amortized over the assets useful lives of
3 years. The Companys new enterprise resource
planning information system will be amortized over a useful life
of 7 years.
At each of October 31, 2007 and 2006, equipment amounting
to $1.3 million was capitalized under capital leases.
Related accumulated amortization as of October 31, 2007 and
October 31, 2006 amounted to $1.3 million and
$1.2 million, respectively.
92
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Purchased
Intangible Assets
Purchased intangible assets subject to amortization consisted of
the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31, 2007
|
|
|
October 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Developed technology
|
|
$
|
172,564
|
|
|
$
|
(64,981
|
)
|
|
$
|
107,583
|
|
|
$
|
35,164
|
|
|
$
|
(28,616
|
)
|
|
$
|
6,548
|
|
Core technology
|
|
|
14,442
|
|
|
|
(14,442
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,442
|
|
|
|
(12,517
|
)
|
|
|
1,925
|
|
Trade name
|
|
|
22,225
|
|
|
|
(22,225
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,225
|
|
|
|
(19,942
|
)
|
|
|
2,283
|
|
Internal use software
|
|
|
4,485
|
|
|
|
(853
|
)
|
|
|
3,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
91,023
|
|
|
|
(32,165
|
)
|
|
|
58,858
|
|
|
|
19,314
|
|
|
|
(13,526
|
)
|
|
|
5,788
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
304,739
|
|
|
$
|
(134,666
|
)
|
|
$
|
170,073
|
|
|
$
|
91,145
|
|
|
$
|
(74,601
|
)
|
|
$
|
16,544
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of purchased intangibles was allocated as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Included in cost of net revenues
|
|
$
|
37,897
|
|
|
$
|
5,625
|
|
|
$
|
6,935
|
|
Included in operating expenses
|
|
|
21,571
|
|
|
|
4,703
|
|
|
|
4,967
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
59,468
|
|
|
$
|
10,328
|
|
|
$
|
11,902
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated future amortization expense of intangible assets as of
October 31 is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Revenues
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
32,025
|
|
|
$
|
25,682
|
|
|
$
|
57,707
|
|
2009
|
|
|
31,774
|
|
|
|
20,507
|
|
|
|
52,281
|
|
2010
|
|
|
24,894
|
|
|
|
12,059
|
|
|
|
36,953
|
|
2011
|
|
|
15,120
|
|
|
|
3,612
|
|
|
|
18,732
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
3,770
|
|
|
|
630
|
|
|
|
4,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
107,583
|
|
|
$
|
62,490
|
|
|
$
|
170,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
Activity related to goodwill consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year
|
|
$
|
52,689
|
|
|
$
|
47,260
|
|
Additions related to acquisitions
|
|
|
540,043
|
|
|
|
6,352
|
|
Resolution of tax contingencies, adjustments to tax reserves and
valuation allowances established in purchase accounting, and tax
benefits from exercise of vested stock options assumed
|
|
|
(5,229
|
)
|
|
|
(923
|
)
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
24,474
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
$
|
611,977
|
|
|
$
|
52,689
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2007, the Company recorded goodwill related
to the acquisition of Lipman of $530.4 million and goodwill
related to the additional investment in VTS of
$3.4 million. In addition, the Company recorded
93
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
$6.1 million of additional goodwill upon finalization of
the purchase price allocation for PayWare. During fiscal year
2006, the Company initially recorded goodwill related to the
acquisition of PayWare of $6.4 million.
Restricted
Cash
As of October 31, 2007, the Company had $1.3 million
in restricted cash of which $619,000 was related to guarantees
provided to customers, $429,000 was related to an escrow
account, and $239,000 was related to the Companys credit
facility, all of which are recorded in other assets in the
consolidated balance sheets. As of October 31, 2006, the
Company had $631,000 in restricted cash of which $380,000 was
related to an escrow account, $46,000 was related to an office
facility, and $205,000 was related to the Companys credit
facility, all of which are recorded in other assets in the
consolidated balance sheets.
Warranty
Activity related to warranty consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year
|
|
$
|
5,432
|
|
|
$
|
5,243
|
|
Warranty charged to cost of net revenues
|
|
|
3,664
|
|
|
|
3,311
|
|
Utilization of warranty
|
|
|
(13,089
|
)
|
|
|
(3,815
|
)
|
Changes in estimates(1)
|
|
|
4,768
|
|
|
|
693
|
|
Warranty liabilities assumed on acquisitions
|
|
|
10,892
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
|
11,667
|
|
|
|
5,432
|
|
Less current portion
|
|
|
(11,012
|
)
|
|
|
(4,902
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term portion
|
|
$
|
655
|
|
|
$
|
530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
A change in warranty estimates of $3.0 million related to a
product specific warranty reserve for an acquired product,
following the establishment of a field replacement program. The
remainder of the change in estimate is due a combination of
higher failure rates for certain product lines and price
increases from the Companys outsourced repair vendors. |
Deferred
Revenue, Net
Deferred revenue, net of related costs consisted of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
$
|
58,992
|
|
|
$
|
34,309
|
|
Deferred cost of revenue
|
|
|
(4,669
|
)
|
|
|
(3,371
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,323
|
|
|
|
30,938
|
|
Less long-term portion
|
|
|
(11,274
|
)
|
|
|
(7,371
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion, net
|
|
$
|
43,049
|
|
|
$
|
23,567
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Other
Current Liabilities
Other current liabilities consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Taxes payable (excluding income taxes)
|
|
$
|
39,310
|
|
|
$
|
1,990
|
|
Other accounts payable
|
|
|
16,246
|
|
|
|
7,511
|
|
Accrued audit and legal fees
|
|
|
4,693
|
|
|
|
3,135
|
|
Interest payable
|
|
|
2,620
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
21,904
|
|
|
|
1,014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
84,773
|
|
|
$
|
13,655
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two of the Companys Brazilian subsidiaries that were
acquired as part of the Lipman acquisition have been notified of
assessments regarding Brazilian customs penalties that relate to
alleged infractions in the importation of goods. The Company has
accrued $19.4 million, including interest, related to these
assessments. See Note 11 for additional information related
to these tax assessments.
Other
Expense, Net
Other expense, net consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Loss on debt extinguishment and debt repricing fee
|
|
$
|
(4,764
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,359
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,630
|
)
|
Foreign currency transaction gains, net
|
|
|
2,534
|
|
|
|
397
|
|
|
|
428
|
|
Foreign currency contract losses, net
|
|
|
(4,804
|
)
|
|
|
(866
|
)
|
|
|
(1,227
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(848
|
)
|
|
|
434
|
|
|
|
(244
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(7,882
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,394
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,673
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Income
Accumulated other comprehensive income consisted of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments, net of tax of $2,664
and $1,068
|
|
$
|
22,224
|
|
|
$
|
1,003
|
|
Unrecognized loss on interest rate hedges, net of tax of $41 and
$29
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities, net of tax of
zero and $1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
22,161
|
|
|
$
|
958
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense allocated to the components of accumulated
other comprehensive income consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
$
|
1,596
|
|
|
$
|
234
|
|
|
$
|
299
|
|
Unrealized loss on interest rate hedges
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,608
|
|
|
$
|
252
|
|
|
$
|
384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Financing
The Companys financings consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Secured credit facility:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolver
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Term B loan
|
|
|
236,250
|
|
|
|
192,780
|
|
1.375% Senior convertible notes
|
|
|
316,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital leases and other
|
|
|
652
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
553,152
|
|
|
|
192,889
|
|
Less current portion
|
|
|
(5,386
|
)
|
|
|
(1,985
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term portion
|
|
$
|
547,766
|
|
|
$
|
190,904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured
Credit Facility
On June 30, 2004, the Company entered into a secured credit
facility (the Old Credit Facility) with a syndicate
of financial institutions. The Old Credit Facility consisted of
a Revolver permitting borrowings up to $30.0 million, a
Term B Loan of $190.0 million, and a Second Lien Loan of
$72.0 million. On May 4, 2005, the Company used a
portion of the net proceeds that it received from its initial
public offering to repay in full the Second Lien Loan and to pay
a prepayment premium of $2.2 million.
On October 31, 2006, VeriFone Inc. entered into a credit
agreement (the Credit Facility) consisting of a Term
B Loan facility of $500.0 million and a revolving credit
facility permitting borrowings of up to $40.0 million. The
proceeds from the Term B loan were used to repay all outstanding
amounts relating to the Old Credit Facility, pay certain
transaction costs, and partially fund the cash consideration in
connection with the acquisition of Lipman on November 1,
2006. Through October 31, 2007, the Company had repaid an
aggregate of $263.8 million, leaving a Term B Loan balance
of $236.2 million at October 31, 2007.
The Credit Facility is guaranteed by the Company and certain of
its subsidiaries and is secured by collateral including
substantially all of the Companys assets and stock of the
Companys subsidiaries. At October 31, 2007 and
October 31, 2006, the interest rates, per annum, were 7.11%
and 7.12% on the Term B Loan and 6.61% and 6.87% on the
revolving loan, respectively. The Company pays a commitment fee
on the unused portion of the revolving loan under its Credit
Facility at a rate that varies between 0.375% and 0.300% per
annum depending upon its consolidated total leverage ratio. The
Company was paying a commitment fee at a rate of 0.300% per
annum as of October 31, 2007 and 0.375% per annum as of
October 31, 2006. The Company pays a letter of credit fee
on the unused portion of any letter of credit issued under the
Credit Facility at a rate that varies between 1.50% and 1.25%
per annum depending upon its consolidated total leverage ratio.
At October 31, 2007 and October 31, 2006, the Company
was subject to a letter of credit fee at a rate of 1.25% and
1.50% per annum, respectively.
As of October 31, 2007, at the Companys option, the
revolving loan bears interest at a rate of 1.25% over the
three-month LIBOR, which was 5.36%, or 0.25% over the
lenders base rate, which was 7.50%. As of October 31,
2006, at the Companys option, the revolving loan bore
interest at a rate of 1.50% over the three-month LIBOR, which
was 5.37%, or 0.50% over the lenders base rate, which was
8.25%. As of October 31, 2007, the entire
$40.0 million revolving loan was available for borrowing to
meet short-term working capital requirements. As of
October 31, 2007, at the Companys option, the Term B
Loan bears interest at a rate of 1.75% over the three-month
LIBOR or 0.75% over the lenders base rate. At
October 31, 2006, the Term B loan bore interest at a rate
of 1.75% over the three-month LIBOR, or 0.75% over the
lenders base rate.
96
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Interest payments are generally paid quarterly but can be based
on one, two, three, or six-month periods. The lenders base
rate is the greater of the Federal Funds rate plus 50 basis
points or the JP Morgan prime rate. The respective maturity
dates on the components of the Credit Facility are
October 31, 2012 for the revolving loan and
October 31, 2013 for the Term B Loan. Payments on the Term
B Loan are due in equal quarterly installments of
$1.2 million over the seven-year term on the last business
day of each calendar quarter with the balance due on maturity.
The terms of the Credit Facility require the Company to comply
with financial covenants, including maintaining leverage and
fixed charge coverage ratios at the end of each fiscal quarter,
obtaining protection against fluctuation in interest rates, and
meeting limits on annual capital expenditure levels. As of
October 31, 2007, the Company was required to maintain a
total leverage ratio of not greater than 4.0 to 1.0 and a fixed
charge coverage ratio of at least 2.0 to 1.0. Total leverage
ratio is equal to total debt less cash as of the end of a
reporting fiscal quarter divided by consolidated EBITDA, as
adjusted, for the most recent four consecutive fiscal quarters.
Some of the financial covenants become more restrictive over the
term of the Credit Facility. Noncompliance with any of the
financial covenants without cure or waiver would constitute an
event of default under the Credit Facility. An event of default
resulting from a breach of a financial covenant may result, at
the option of lenders holding a majority of the loans, in an
acceleration of repayment of the principal and interest
outstanding and a termination of the revolving loan. The Credit
Facility also contains non-financial covenants that restrict
some of the Companys activities, including its ability to
dispose of assets, incur additional debt, pay dividends, create
liens, make investments, make capital expenditures, and engage
in specified transactions with affiliates. The terms of the
Credit Facility permit prepayments of principal and require
prepayments of principal upon the occurrence of certain events
including among others, the receipt of proceeds from the sale of
assets, the receipt of excess cash flow as defined, and the
receipt of proceeds of certain debt issues. The Credit Facility
also contains customary events of default, including defaults
based on events of bankruptcy and insolvency; nonpayment of
principal, interest, or fees when due, subject to specified
grace periods; breach of specified covenants; change in control;
and material inaccuracy of representations and warranties. The
Company was in compliance with its financial and non-financial
covenants as of October 31, 2007.
On January 25, 2008, the Companys subsidiaries,
VeriFone, Inc. (the Borrower) and VeriFone
Intermediate Holdings, Inc. entered into a First Amendment to
the Credit Agreement and Waiver (the First
Amendment) with the Lenders under its Credit Facility,
dated October 31, 2006. The First Amendment extends the
deadlines for delivery of certain required financial information
for the three-month periods ended January 31, April 30, and
July 31, 2007, the year ended October 31, 2007, and
the three-month period ended January 31, 2008. In
connection with the First Amendment, the Borrower paid to
consenting Lenders a fee of $0.7 million, or 0.25% of the
aggregate amount outstanding under the Term B loan and revolving
credit commitment made available by the consenting Lenders, and
agreed to an increase in the interest rate payable on the term
loan of 0.25% per annum.
On April 28, 2008, the Borrower and VeriFone Intermediate
Holdings, Inc. entered into a Second Amendment to the Credit
Agreement (the Second Amendment) with the Lenders
under its Credit Facility. The Second Amendment extends the time
periods for delivery of certain required financial information
for the three-month periods ended January 31, April 30, and
July 31, 2007, the year ended October 31, 2007, and
the three-month periods ended January 31 and April 30,
2008. In connection with the Second Amendment, the Borrower paid
to consenting Lenders a fee of $0.7 million, or 0.25% of
the aggregate amount outstanding under the term loan and
revolving credit commitment made available by the consenting
Lenders, agreed to an additional increase in the interest rate
payable on the Term B loan and any revolving commitments of
0.75% per annum, agreed to an increase of 0.125% per annum to
the commitment fee for unused revolving commitments, and agreed
to an increase of 0.75% per annum to the letter of credit fees,
each of which are effective from the date of the Second
Amendment.
On July 31, 2008, the Borrower and VeriFone Intermediate
Holdings, Inc. entered into a Third Amendment to the Credit
Agreement (the Third Amendment) with the Lenders
under its Credit Facility. The Third Amendment extends the time
periods for delivery of certain required financial information
for the three-month periods ended
97
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
January 31, April 30, and July 31, 2007, the year
ended October 31, 2007, and the three-month periods ended
January 31 and April 30, 2008 to August 31, 2008. In
connection with the Third Amendment, the Borrower paid to
consenting Lenders a fee of $0.3 million, or 0.125% of the
aggregate amount outstanding under the Term B loan and the
amount of the revolving credit commitment made available by the
consenting Lenders. Following the Third Amendment, the Borrower
pays interest on the Term B loan at a rate of 2.75% over
three-month LIBOR (the Borrower may elect at the end of an
interest period to have the term loan bear interest at 1.75%
over the lenders base rate) and any revolving loans would
bear interest, at the Borrowers option at either 2.0% over
three-month LIBOR or 1.0% over the lenders base rate,
assuming the Borrower remains in the lowest rate tier based on
its total consolidated leverage ratio.
In each of the Credit Agreement amendments, the Lenders agreed
that no default that may have arisen under the Credit Agreement
by virtue of any failure to deliver accurate financial
statements or the related certifications for the fiscal quarters
being restated would be a Default or an Event of Default as
defined under the Credit Agreement. The Lenders also agreed that
any such Default or Event of Default would for all purposes of
the Credit Agreement and related loan documents be waived.
1.375% Senior
Convertible Notes
On June 22, 2007, the Company sold $316.2 million
aggregate principal amount of 1.375% Senior Convertible
Notes due 2012 (the Notes) in an offering through
Lehman Brothers Inc. and JP Morgan Securities Inc. (together
initial purchasers) to qualified institutional
buyers pursuant to Section 4(2) and Rule 144A under
the Securities Act. The net proceeds from the offering, after
deducting transaction costs, were approximately
$307.9 million. The Company incurred approximately
$8.3 million of debt issuance costs. The transaction costs,
consisting of the initial purchasers discounts and
offering expenses, were primarily recorded in debt issuance
costs, net and are being amortized to interest expense using the
effective interest method over five years. The Company will pay
1.375% interest per annum on the principal amount of the Notes,
payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and December
15 of each year, commencing on December 15, 2007, subject
to increase in certain circumstances as described below.
The Notes were issued under an Indenture between the Company and
U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee. Each $1,000 of
principal of the Notes will initially be convertible into
22.719 shares of VeriFone common stock, which is equivalent
to a conversion price of approximately $44.02 per share, subject
to adjustment upon the occurrence of specified events. Holders
of the Notes may convert their Notes prior to maturity during
specified periods as follows: (1) on any date during any
fiscal quarter beginning after October 31, 2007 (and only
during such fiscal quarter) if the closing sale price of the
Companys common stock was more than 130% of the then
current conversion price for at least 20 trading days in the
period of the 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last
trading day of the previous fiscal quarter; (2) at any time
on or after March 15, 2012; (3) if the Company
distributes, to all holders of its common stock, rights or
warrants (other than pursuant to a rights plan) entitling them
to purchase, for a period of 45 calendar days or less, shares of
the Companys common stock at a price less than the average
closing sale price for the ten trading days preceding the
declaration date for such distribution; (4) if the Company
distributes, to all holders of its common stock, cash or other
assets, debt securities, or rights to purchase the
Companys securities (other than pursuant to a rights
plan), which distribution has a per share value exceeding 10% of
the closing sale price of the Companys common stock on the
trading day preceding the declaration date for such
distribution; (5) during a specified period if certain
types of fundamental changes occur; or (6) during the five
business-day
period following any five consecutive
trading-day
period in which the trading price for the Notes was less than
98% of the average of the closing sale price of the
Companys common stock for each day during such five
trading-day
period multiplied by the then current conversion rate. Upon
conversion, the Company would pay the holder the cash value of
the applicable number of shares of VeriFone common stock, up to
the principal amount of the note. Amounts in excess of the
principal amount, if any, will be paid in stock. Unless and
until the Company obtains stockholder approval to amend its
certificate of incorporation to increase its authorized capital,
the maximum number of shares available for issuance upon
conversion of each $1,000 principal amount of Notes will
98
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
be the pro rata portion of an aggregate of 3,250,000 shares
allocable to such Note, which equates to 10.2766 shares per
$1,000 principal amount of Notes. The Company has agreed to use
its reasonable best efforts to seek such stockholder approval
within one year of the issuance of the Notes. Because the
Company did not increase its authorized capital to permit
conversion of all of the Notes at the initial conversion rate by
June 21, 2008, beginning on June 21, 2008 the Notes
began to bear additional interest at a rate of 2.0% per annum
(in addition to the additional interest described below) on the
principal amount of the Notes, which will increase by 0.25% per
annum on each anniversary thereafter if the authorized capital
has not been increased. If stockholder approval to increase the
Companys authorized capital is received, such additional
interest will cease to accrue.
As of October 31, 2007, none of the conditions allowing
holders of the Notes to convert had been met. If a fundamental
change, as defined in the Indenture, occurs prior to the
maturity date, holders of the Notes may require the Company to
repurchase all or a portion of their Notes for cash at a
repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
Notes to be repurchased, plus any accrued and unpaid interest
(including additional interest, if any) to, but excluding, the
repurchase date.
The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and rank equal in
right of payment with all of the Companys existing and
future senior unsecured indebtedness. The Notes are effectively
subordinated to any secured indebtedness to the extent of the
value of the related collateral and structurally subordinated to
indebtedness and other liabilities of the Companys
subsidiaries including any secured indebtedness of such
subsidiaries.
In connection with the sale of the Notes, the Company entered
into a registration rights agreement, dated as of June 22,
2007, with the initial purchasers of the Notes (the
Registration Rights Agreement). Under the
Registration Rights Agreement, the Company has agreed
(1) to use reasonable best efforts to cause a shelf
registration statement covering resales of the Notes and the
shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Notes to
be declared effective by December 19, 2007 or to cause an
existing shelf registration statement to be made available
within 180 days after the original issuance of the Notes
and (2) to use its reasonable best efforts to keep
effective the shelf registration statement until the earliest of
(i) the date when the holders of transfer restricted Notes
and shares of common stock issued upon conversion of the Notes
are able to sell all such securities immediately without
restriction under Rule 144(k) under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended (the Securities Act), (ii) the
date when all transfer-restricted Notes and shares of common
stock issued upon conversion of the Notes are registered under
the registration statement and sold pursuant thereto and
(iii) the date when all transfer-restricted Notes and
shares of common stock issued upon conversion of the Notes have
ceased to be outstanding. If the Company fails to meet these
terms, it will be required to pay additional interest on the
Notes at a rate of 0.25% per annum for the first 90 days
and at a rate of 0.50% per annum thereafter.
Due to the delay in the filing of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
the Company has not yet been able to register the Notes and the
shares underlying the Notes. Accordingly, the interest rate on
the Notes increased by 0.25% per annum on December 20, 2007
and by an additional 0.25% per annum on March 19, 2008
relating to the Companys obligations under the
Registration Rights Agreement. Once a registration statement
covering the Notes and shares underlying the Notes is declared
effective, such additional interest will cease to accrue. As of
October 31, 2007, the Company accrued $0.6 million related
to the interest penalty on the Notes.
In addition, the interest rate on the Notes increased an
additional 0.25% per annum on May 1, 2008 (in addition to
the additional interest described above) because the Company
failed to file and deliver this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Such additional 0.25% interest will cease to accrue upon the
filing of this
Form 10-K.
In connection with the offering of the Notes, the Company
entered into note hedge transactions with affiliates of the
initial purchasers (the counterparties) whereby the
Company has the option to purchase up to 7,184,884 shares
of its common stock at a price of approximately $44.02 per
share. The cost to the Company of the note hedge transactions
was approximately $80.2 million. The note hedge
transactions are intended to mitigate the potential dilution
upon conversion of the Notes in the event that the volume
weighted average price of the Companys common stock on
each trading day of the relevant conversion period or other
relevant valuation
99
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
period is greater than the applicable strike price of the
convertible note hedge transactions, which initially corresponds
to the conversion price of the Notes and is subject, with
certain exceptions, to the adjustments applicable to the
conversion price of the Notes.
In addition, the Company sold warrants to the counterparties
whereby they have the option to purchase up to approximately
7.2 million shares of VeriFone common stock at a price of
$62.356 per share. The Company received approximately
$31.2 million in cash proceeds from the sale of these
warrants. If the volume weighted average price of the
Companys common stock on each trading day of the
measurement period at maturity of the warrants exceeds the
applicable strike price of the warrants, there would be dilution
to the extent that such volume weighted average price of the
Companys common stock exceeds the applicable strike price
of the warrants. Unless and until the Company obtains
stockholder approval to amend its certificate of incorporation
to increase its authorized capital, the maximum number of shares
issuable upon exercise of the warrants will be
1,000,000 shares of the Companys common stock. If the
Company does not obtain stockholder approval to amend its
certificate of incorporation to increase its authorized capital
by the date of the second annual meeting of the Companys
stockholders after the date of the pricing of the Notes, the
number of shares of the Companys common stock underlying
the warrants will increase by 10%, and the warrants will be
subject to early termination by the counterparties.
The cost incurred in connection with the note hedge
transactions, net of the related tax benefit and the proceeds
from the sale of the warrants, is included as a net reduction in
additional paid-in capital in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets as of October 31, 2007, in accordance with
the guidance in
EITF 00-19,
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to,
and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock.
In accordance with SFAS No. 128, Earnings per
Share, the Notes will have no impact on diluted earnings per
share, or EPS, until the price of the Companys common
stock exceeds the conversion price of $44.02 per share because
the principal amount of the Notes will be settled in cash upon
conversion. Prior to conversion the Company will include the
effect of the additional shares that may be issued if its common
stock price exceeds $44.02 per share, using the treasury stock
method. If the price of the Companys common stock exceeds
$62.356 per share, it will also include the effect of the
additional potential shares that may be issued related to the
warrants, using the treasury stock method. Prior to conversion,
the note hedge transactions are not considered for purposes of
the EPS calculation as their effect would be anti-dilutive.
Capital
Leases
At October 31, 2007 and 2006, the Companys obligation
under capital leases totaled $63,000 and $109,000, respectively.
Of these amounts, $37,000 and $57,000, respectively, were
included in the current portion of long-term debt and $26,000
and $52,000, respectively, were included in long-term debt, net
of current portion in the consolidated balance sheets at
October 31, 2007 and 2006.
100
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Principal
Payments
Principal payments due for financings, including capital leases,
over the next five years and thereafter are as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years ending October 31:
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
5,386
|
|
2009
|
|
|
5,261
|
|
2010
|
|
|
5,004
|
|
2011
|
|
|
5,001
|
|
2012
|
|
|
321,250
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
211,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
553,152
|
|
Amount representing interest on capital leases
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
553,150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
US
|
|
$
|
(15,390
|
)
|
|
$
|
74,267
|
|
|
$
|
40,625
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
6,092
|
|
|
|
17,403
|
|
|
|
6,104
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(9,298
|
)
|
|
$
|
91,670
|
|
|
$
|
46,729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision for (benefit from) income taxes consisted of the
following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
8,964
|
|
|
$
|
28,618
|
|
|
$
|
19,717
|
|
State
|
|
|
1,843
|
|
|
|
5,257
|
|
|
|
3,754
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
12,250
|
|
|
|
4,179
|
|
|
|
2,984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,057
|
|
|
|
38,054
|
|
|
|
26,455
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
2,127
|
|
|
|
(4,744
|
)
|
|
|
(11,215
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
(476
|
)
|
|
|
(1,640
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(1,201
|
)
|
|
|
(675
|
)
|
|
|
(110
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,661
|
|
|
|
(5,895
|
)
|
|
|
(12,965
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,718
|
|
|
$
|
32,159
|
|
|
$
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of taxes computed at the federal statutory
income tax rate to the provision for income taxes is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) computed at the federal statutory rate
|
|
$
|
(3,254
|
)
|
|
$
|
32,084
|
|
|
$
|
16,355
|
|
State income tax, net of federal tax benefit
|
|
|
1,651
|
|
|
|
3,108
|
|
|
|
1,374
|
|
Foreign income taxes
|
|
|
1,445
|
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
1,175
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
23,571
|
|
|
|
(2,304
|
)
|
|
|
(4,836
|
)
|
Stock compensation
|
|
|
1,302
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
|
|
548
|
|
Research credit
|
|
|
(763
|
)
|
|
|
(190
|
)
|
|
|
(301
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
766
|
|
|
|
381
|
|
|
|
(825
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
24,718
|
|
|
$
|
32,159
|
|
|
$
|
13,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary
differences between the carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts
used for income tax purposes. The significant components of the
Companys deferred tax assets and liabilities were as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
$
|
7,516
|
|
|
$
|
4,457
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
27,151
|
|
|
|
13,576
|
|
Accrued expenses and reserves
|
|
|
13,719
|
|
|
|
7,809
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
12,815
|
|
|
|
9,378
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
5,908
|
|
|
|
1,400
|
|
Acquisition related items
|
|
|
33,900
|
|
|
|
23,887
|
|
Foreign currency
|
|
|
1,862
|
|
|
|
603
|
|
Stock option compensation
|
|
|
7,635
|
|
|
|
2,542
|
|
Debt related
|
|
|
30,728
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign taxes on basis differences
|
|
|
63,247
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign tax credit carryforwards
|
|
|
7,163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
211,644
|
|
|
|
63,652
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(119,536
|
)
|
|
|
(25,248
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition related items
|
|
|
(28,841
|
)
|
|
|
(2,150
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(788
|
)
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
Foreign currency
|
|
|
(7,714
|
)
|
|
|
(1,021
|
)
|
Basis differences in investments in foreign subsidiaries
|
|
|
(53,645
|
)
|
|
|
(96
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(2,766
|
)
|
|
|
(941
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(93,754
|
)
|
|
|
(4,296
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets (liability)
|
|
$
|
(1,646
|
)
|
|
$
|
34,108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of October 31, 2007, the Company has recorded a net
deferred tax liability of $1.6 million. The realization of
the deferred tax assets is primarily dependent on the
Companys generating sufficient U.S. and foreign
taxable income in future fiscal years. Management has determined
that it is more likely than not the deferred tax assets
associated with U.S. foreign tax credit carryforwards,
foreign taxes on basis differences, certain foreign net
operating losses, and tax deductible intangible assets reversing
beyond 2010 will not be realized and as such a valuation
allowance has been recorded at October 31, 2007. Although
realization is not assured, management believes that it is more
likely than not that the remaining deferred tax assets will be
realized. The amount of deferred tax assets considered
realizable, however, may increase or decrease when the Company
reevaluates periodically the underlying basis for its estimates
of future taxable income.
At October 31, 2007 and 2006, the Company has recorded a
valuation allowance for deferred tax assets of
$119.5 million and $25.2 million, respectively. The
Companys deferred tax asset valuation allowance increased
by $94.3 million for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007, increased by $4.6 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2006, and decreased by $4.9 million for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005. The increase of
$94.3 million during fiscal year 2007 is primarily
attributable to foreign tax credit carryforwards and foreign
taxes on basis differences associated with the acquisition of
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. Approximately
$79.3 million of deferred tax assets subject to the
valuation allowance are attributable to acquisition-related
items that, when realized, will reduce goodwill. During the
fiscal years ended October 31, 2007 and 2006, goodwill was
reduced by approximately $1.0 million and
$0.2 million, respectively, as a result of a reduction in
the valuation allowance for acquisition-related deferred tax
assets that were realized.
The net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLS, are primarily
related to tax losses in Ireland of $152.9 million, France
of $7.0 million, the United Kingdom of $8.1 million,
Brazil of $4.8 million and various other
non-U.S. countries
of $4.9 million. Approximately $174.2 million of
foreign NOLs may be carried forward indefinitely. The remaining
balance of approximately $3.1 million of foreign NOLs is
subject to limited carry forward terms of 5 to 15 years.
NOLs of $0 million, $0.4 million, and
$0.6 million will expire in fiscal 2008, 2009 and 2010,
respectively, if not utilized. The Company recorded tax benefits
in the amount of $3.8 million net of valuation allowance
for net operating losses for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007.
During fiscal year 2007 the Company recorded U.S. foreign
tax credit carryforwards of $7.2 million, which will expire
beginning in 2018, if not utilized.
The Company reduced tax liabilities by $0.9 million and
$0.8 million, for the fiscal years ended October 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively, due to the resolution of certain
pre-acquisition tax contingencies. The reduction in tax
liabilities resulted in a reduction of goodwill by
$0.9 million and $0.7 million for the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007 and 2006 for tax liabilities
recorded for the period prior to the Companys 2002
acquisition.
The Company recognizes deferred tax liabilities associated with
outside basis differences on investment in foreign subsidiaries
unless the difference is considered essentially permanent in
duration. As of October 31, 2007, the Company has recorded
a deferred tax liability of $53.6 million associated with
$162.6 million of taxable outside basis differences which
are not considered permanently reinvested. The Company has not
recorded deferred taxes on approximately $33.0 million of
taxable outside basis differences as they are considered
permanently reinvested. As of October 31, 2007, the
determination of the unrecorded deferred tax liability related
to these earnings is not practicable. If circumstances change
and it becomes apparent that some or all of the undistributed
earnings will not be invested indefinitely, or will be remitted
in the foreseeable future, an additional deferred tax liability
will be recorded for some or all of the outside basis difference.
The Company has been granted pioneer status for its operations
in Singapore commencing November 1, 2005. The tax rate for
enterprises granted pioneer status in Singapore is 0%. The
benefits of the pioneer status will expire on November 1,
2011. The tax benefit of the tax holiday for the year ended
October 31, 2007 was $1.9 million.
The Companys subsidiary in Israel and a subsidiary in
Brazil are currently under audit by the Israeli and Brazilian
taxing authorities for its fiscal years 2004 to 2006 and
calendar years 2003 to 2008, respectively. Although
103
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the Company believes it has provided income taxes for the years
subject to audit, the Israeli and Brazilian taxing authorities
may adopt different interpretations. The Company has not yet
received any final determinations with respect to these audits.
The Company is currently subject to an audit by the Internal
Revenue Service, or IRS, for its fiscal years ended
October 31, 2003 and 2004. Although the Company believes it
has provided income taxes for the years subject to audit, the
Internal Revenue Service may adopt different interpretations.
The Company has not yet received any final determinations with
respect to this audit although certain adjustments have been
agreed with the IRS. The tax liability associated with the
agreed adjustments has been accrued in the financial statements.
Note 7. Stockholders
Equity
Common
and Preferred Stock
On May 4, 2005, the Company amended its Certificate of
Incorporation to authorize 100,000,000 shares of Common
Stock, par value $0.01 per share, and 10,000,000 shares of
Preferred Stock, par value $0.01. The holder of each share of
Common Stock has the right to one vote. The board of directors
has the authority to issue the undesignated Preferred Stock in
one or more series and to fix the rights, preferences,
privileges and restrictions thereof. At October 31, 2007
and October 31, 2006, there were no shares of Preferred
Stock outstanding and there were 84,060,120 and
68,148,245 shares of Common Stock outstanding, respectively.
On May 4, 2005, in connection with the amendment and
restatement of its Certificate of Incorporation, the Company
converted all Nonvoting shares of Common Stock to Voting shares
of Common Stock on a one-for-one basis, with a corresponding
effective conversion of all outstanding options to purchase
Nonvoting shares of Common Stock and shares reserved for
issuance under the New Founders Stock Option Plan. As a
result of that modification, the Company recognized additional
compensation expense of $44,000 and $35,000 for the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
On May 4, 2005, the Company completed an initial public
offering of 15.4 million shares of its Common Stock at a
price of $10.00 per share. Of the shares sold, 8.5 million
shares, with an aggregate offering price of $85.0 million,
were sold by the Company and 9.2 million shares, with an
aggregate offering price of $92.1 million were sold by
selling stockholders, including the underwriters
over-allotment of 2.3 million shares.
On September 23, 2005, the Company completed a follow-on
public offering of 13.1 million shares of its Common Stock
at a price of $20.78 per share. Of the shares sold,
2.5 million shares, with an aggregate offering price of
$51.9 million, were sold by the Company and
10.6 million shares, with an aggregate offering price of
$219.8 million were sold by selling stockholders. The
Company received approximately $48.7 million in net
proceeds from this offering.
On November 1, 2006, the Company completed its acquisition
of Lipman. As part of the acquisition consideration, the Company
issued 13,462,474 shares of its common stock. See
Note 3 Business Combinations for
additional information.
Restricted
Common Stock
The Company had a right to repurchase shares of Common Stock
sold to the Companys Chief Executive Officer (the
CEO) at the original sale price, $0.0333 per share,
in the event the CEO ceased to be employed by the Company or any
of its subsidiaries. This right lapsed at a rate of 20% of the
original 3,910,428 shares per year. Upon the sale of the
Company, any remaining unvested shares would have become vested.
At October 31, 2007 and 2006, zero and 782,085 shares
of Common Stock issued to the CEO remained subject to this
repurchase right which lapsed in July 2007.
The Company had a right to repurchase shares of Common Stock
sold to certain executives of the Company pursuant to the
Companys 2002 Securities Purchase Plan at the lesser of
the original sale price, $0.0333 per share,
104
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
or the fair value on the date of separation in the event that
the executive ceased to be employed by the Company or any of its
subsidiaries. This right lapsed at a rate of 20% of the original
1,929,145 shares per year. Upon the sale of the Company,
any remaining unvested shares would have become vested. At
October 31, 2007 and 2006, zero and 218,985 shares of
Common Stock remained subject to this repurchase right which
lapsed in October 2007.
Pursuant to APB No. 25, the Company recorded deferred
stock-based compensation of $446,000 in connection with several
sales of Common Stock to the executives before October 31,
2003. The deferred stock-based compensation represents the
difference between the fair value of the Companys Common
Stock for accounting purposes and the original sale price. The
Company amortized the deferred stock-based compensation to
expense on a straight-line basis over the vesting period through
April 30, 2005. The Company ceased amortization of this
stock-based compensation pursuant to APB No. 25 on
April 30, 2005 upon adoption of SFAS No. 123(R).
During the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005, the Company
recorded $52,000 of stock-based compensation expense, which was
included in general and administrative expenses in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations.
The following table summarizes Restricted Common Stock activity
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-Date
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at November 1, 2006
|
|
|
1,001,070
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
1,001,070
|
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at October 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest at October 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,001,070
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
Option Plans
As of October 31, 2007, the Company had a total of
8,331,637 stock options outstanding with a weighted average
exercise price of $27.10 per share. The number of shares that
remained available for future grants was 2,288,934 as of
October 31, 2007.
New
Founders Stock Option Plan
On April 30, 2003, the Company adopted the New
Founders Stock Option Plan (the New Founders
Plan) for executives and employees of the Company. A total
of 1,500,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock were
reserved for issuance under the New Founders Plan. The
Company will no longer grant options under the New
Founders Plan and will retire any options cancelled
hereafter. Option awards under the New Founders Plan were
generally granted with an exercise price equal to the market
price of the Companys stock on the date of grant. Those
option awards generally vest in equal annual amounts over a
period of five years from the date of grant and have a maximum
term of 10 years.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the fiscal
years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$14.8 million, $7.1 million, and $1.4 million,
respectively. The weighted average grant date fair value of
options granted during the fiscal year ended October 31,
2005 was $6.18. No options were granted under the plan in fiscal
years 2006 or 2007.
As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), there was $672,000 of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested
shared-based compensation arrangements granted under the New
Founders Plan. The cost is expected to be recognized over
a remaining weighted average period of 1.8 years. The total
fair value of
105
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
options vested under the New Founders Plan during each of
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$415,000, $546,000, and $344,000, respectively.
Outside
Directors Stock Option Plan
In January 2005, the Company adopted the Outside Directors
Stock Option Plan (the Directors Plan) for
members of the Board of Directors of the Company who are not
employees of the Company or representatives of major
stockholders of the Company. A total of 225,000 shares of
the Companys Common Stock have been reserved for issuance
under the Directors Plan. The Company will no longer grant
options under the Directors Plan and retired
135,000 shares available for future grant under the
Directors Plan on March 22, 2006 and will retire any
options cancelled thereafter. Option grants for members of the
Board of Directors of the Company who are not employees of the
Company or representatives of major stockholders of the Company
will be covered under the 2006 Equity Incentive Option Plan.
Stock options granted generally vest over a period of four years
from the date of grant and have a maximum term of seven years.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during each of
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$524,000, zero, and zero, respectively. The weighted average
fair value of options granted during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005 was $6.18. No options were granted under
the plan in fiscal years 2006 or 2007.
As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R) there was $166,000 of unrecognized
compensation cost related to non-vested shared-based
compensation arrangements granted under the Directors
Plan. The cost is expected to be recognized over a remaining
weighted average period of 1.2 years. The total fair value
of options vested under the Directors Plan during each of
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$139,000, $231,000, and zero, respectively.
2005
Equity Incentive Option Plan
On April 29, 2005, the Company adopted the 2005 Equity
Incentive Option Plan (the EIP Plan) for executives
and employees of the Company, and other individuals who perform
services to the Company. A total of 3,100,000 shares of the
Companys Common Stock have been reserved for issuance
under the EIP Plan. The Company will no longer grant options
under the EIP Plan and retired 890,300 shares available for
future grant under the EIP Plan on March 22, 2006 and will
retire any options cancelled thereafter. Option awards were
generally granted with an exercise price equal to the market
price of the Companys stock at the day of grant. Those
options generally vest over a period of four years from the date
of grant and have a maximum term of seven years.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during each of
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$15.8 million, $4.0 million, and zero, respectively.
The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted
during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006 and 2005 was
$12.07 and $5.35 per share, respectively. No options were
granted under the plan in fiscal year 2007.
As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), there was $4.6 million of
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share-based
compensation arrangements granted under the EIP Plan. The cost
is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted average
period of 1.6 years. The total fair value of options vested
under the EIP Plan during the each of the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was $4.2 million,
$3.1 million, and zero, respectively.
2006
Equity Incentive Plan
On March 22, 2006, the stockholders of VeriFone approved
the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the 2006 Plan) for
officers, directors, employees, and consultants of the Company.
A total of 9,000,000 shares of the Companys Common
Stock have been reserved for issuance under the 2006 Plan.
Awards are granted with an exercise price equal to the market
price of the Companys Common Stock at the date of grant
except for restricted stock units
106
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(RSUs). These awards generally vest over a period of
four years from the date of grant and have a maximum term of
seven years. Any shares granted as stock options and stock
appreciation rights shall be counted as one share for every
share granted. Any awards granted other than stock options or
stock appreciation rights are counted, for the purpose of the
number of shares issuable under the 2006 Plan, as
1.75 shares for every share granted.
In March 2006, September 2006, January 2007, July 2007, and
October 2007, the Company issued 90,000, 80,000, 14,000, 33,000
and 11,000 RSUs, respectively, to its executive officers and key
employees with a zero value exercise price. Twenty-five percent
of these awards shall vest one year from the date of grant and
1/16th vest quarterly thereafter. The fair value of the
RSUs granted is the stock price on March 22, 2006,
September 12, 2006, January 3, 2007, July 2,
2007, and October 1, 2007 of $28.86, $27.50, $35.45,
$35.47, and $44.43, respectively.
As of October 31, 2007, 149,750 RSUs are expected to vest,
with an aggregate intrinsic value of $7.4 million. The
total fair value of RSUs vested during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 was $1.7 million. No RSUs vested in
fiscal year 2006. As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), there was $4.0 million of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to these non-vested RSUs.
The cost is expected to be recognized over the remaining
weighted average period of 3.0 years.
In January 2007, the Company made an award of up to 900,000 RSUs
to the Companys CEO. These RSUs may vest in three tranches
over a four-year period based upon annual growth in the
Companys net income, as adjusted, per share and its share
price. Two-thirds of the RSUs are performance units
that will vest based on achievement of net income, as adjusted,
targets, and one-third of the RSUs are market units
that will vest based on achievement of net income, as adjusted,
targets and specified targets for the share price of the
Companys stock. The performance units are earned in three
annual tranches of up to 200,000 shares each in the event
that the Company meets or exceeds specified annual increases in
net income, as adjusted, per share for fiscal years 2007, 2008,
and 2009, based on a target of 20% annual increases. In
addition, in each of the fiscal years 2007, 2008, and 2009, the
CEO may earn a further 100,000 market units if the Company
achieves both the targeted improvement in net income, as
adjusted, per share and there is a corresponding improvement in
the Companys share price, with a final target of $62.20 as
of October 31, 2009. Each years RSUs will not vest
until the end of the fiscal year following the year for which
the specified target is met.
As of October 31, 2007, the Company had not recognized any
compensation expense related to these RSUs as the fiscal year
2007 financial targets were not achieved. The 200,000
performance units and the 100,000 market units related to fiscal
year 2007 were cancelled on October 31, 2007. The financial
targets for the fiscal 2008 and 2009 tranches have not yet been
determined; therefore, no measurement date has occurred for
those tranches. The Company will value the fiscal 2008 and 2009
tranches when all factors for measurement have been determined
and a measurement date has occurred. Because these shares are
contingently issuable, they are excluded from the earnings per
share calculation.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007 was $3.1 million. There
were no exercises in fiscal year 2006. The weighted average
grant date fair value of options granted during the each of the
fiscal years ended October 31, 2007 and 2006 was $9.59 and
$9.68 per share, respectively.
As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), there was $36.1 million of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share-based
compensation arrangements for options granted under the 2006
Plan. The cost is expected to be recognized over a remaining
weighted average service period of 3.3 years. The total
fair value of options vested during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 was $7.0 million. No options vested
in fiscal year 2006.
Lipman
Plans
As part of the acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006,
VeriFone assumed all of Lipmans outstanding options. The
Company no longer grants options under the Lipman Plans.
107
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007 was $19.6 million.
As of October 31, 2007, pursuant to
SFAS No. 123(R), there was $9.1 million of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share-based
compensation arrangements granted under the Lipman Plans. The
cost is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted
average period of 2.2 years. The total fair value of
options vested during the fiscal year ended October 31,
2007 was $9.4 million.
All
Plans
The total proceeds received from employees as a result of
employee stock option exercises under all plans for each of the
fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$38.3 million, $3.1 million, and $753,000,
respectively. In connection with these exercises, the tax
benefits realized by the Company for each of the fiscal years
2007, 2006, and 2005 were $11.5 million, $3.4 million,
and $0.4 million, respectively.
The Company estimates the grant-date fair value of stock options
using a Black-Scholes valuation model, consistent with the
provisions of SFAS No. 123(R) and
SAB No. 107, Share-Based Payment, using the
weighted-average assumptions noted in the following table.
Expected volatility of the stock is based on a blend of the
Companys peer group in the industry in which it does
business and the Companys historical volatility for its
own stock. The expected term of options granted is derived from
the historical actual term of option grants and represents the
period of time that options granted are expected to be
outstanding. The risk-free rate is based on the US Treasury
zero-coupon issues with a remaining term equal to the expected
term of the options used in the Black-Scholes valuation model.
Estimates of fair value are not intended to predict actual
future events or the value ultimately realized by employees who
receive equity awards, and subsequent events are not indicative
of the reasonableness of the original estimates of fair value
made by the Company under SFAS No. 123(R).
The Companys assumptions subsequent to adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R) are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Expected term of the options
|
|
2 years
|
|
3 years
|
|
4 years
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
4.8%
|
|
5.0%
|
|
4.3%
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
|
40%
|
|
42%
|
|
58%
|
Expected dividend rate
|
|
0.0%
|
|
0.0%
|
|
0.0%
|
The following table presents the stock-based compensation
expense recognized in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R)
during the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and
2005 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues
|
|
$
|
2,998
|
|
|
$
|
709
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
5,937
|
|
|
|
1,194
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
8,942
|
|
|
|
2,057
|
|
|
|
663
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
11,015
|
|
|
|
2,040
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
28,892
|
|
|
$
|
6,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,687
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, stock-based
compensation expense includes $1.0 million related to the
excess over fair value of the vested Lipman options assumed.
108
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock
Option Activity
The following table provides a summary of all stock option plans
as of October 31, 2006 and 2005 and the activity for the
fiscal years ended on those dates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Under
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
Under
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
3,478,245
|
|
|
$
|
8.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,292,940
|
|
|
$
|
3.06
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
2,766,220
|
|
|
$
|
27.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,498,700
|
|
|
$
|
11.05
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(501,966)
|
|
|
$
|
6.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,495)
|
|
|
$
|
3.05
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(336,391)
|
|
|
$
|
15.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(213,900)
|
|
|
$
|
6.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
|
5,406,108
|
|
|
$
|
18.75
|
|
|
|
6.37
|
|
|
$
|
61,476
|
|
|
|
3,478,245
|
|
|
$
|
8.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest at end of year
|
|
|
4,801,456
|
|
|
$
|
19.28
|
|
|
|
6.36
|
|
|
$
|
52,604
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at end of year
|
|
|
860,700
|
|
|
$
|
7.81
|
|
|
|
6.29
|
|
|
$
|
18,414
|
|
|
|
438,615
|
|
|
$
|
3.09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table provides a summary of all stock option plans
as of October 31, 2007 and the activity for the fiscal year
ended that date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Under
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands)
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
|
5,406,108
|
|
|
$
|
18.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed in Lipman acquisition
|
|
|
3,375,527
|
|
|
$
|
24.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
3,279,705
|
|
|
$
|
35.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(2,420,390
|
)
|
|
$
|
15.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(1,309,313
|
)
|
|
$
|
26.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
|
8,331,637
|
|
|
$
|
27.10
|
|
|
|
5.73
|
|
|
$
|
186,019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested or expected to vest at end of year
|
|
|
7,664,092
|
|
|
$
|
27.02
|
|
|
|
5.70
|
|
|
$
|
171,763
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at end of year
|
|
|
1,565,756
|
|
|
$
|
19.60
|
|
|
|
5.19
|
|
|
$
|
46,705
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average grant date fair value per share of options
granted during each of the fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$9.59, $9.82, and $5.83, respectively. The total intrinsic value
of options exercised during each of the fiscal years 2007, 2006,
and 2005 was $53.9 million, $11.1 million and
$1.4 million, respectively.
109
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes RSU activity for the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands)
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of year
|
|
|
170,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
958,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(29,375
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(348,875
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of year
|
|
|
749,750
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
37,060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected to vest at end of year
|
|
|
748,693
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
37,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average grant date fair value per share of RSUs
granted during each of the fiscal years 2007 and 2006, excluding
the CEOs performance and market RSUs which were not valued
due to lack of measurement date, was $36.85 and $28.22,
respectively. The total fair value of RSUs that vested in fiscal
year 2007 was $1.7 million. There were no RSUs which vested
in fiscal year 2006.
Note 8. Restructuring
Charges
Fiscal
Year 2002 Restructuring Plan
In connection with the acquisition of VeriFone, Inc. by the
Company on July 1, 2002, the Company assumed the liability
for a restructuring plan (fiscal 2002 restructuring
plan). The remaining accrued restructuring balance
represents primarily future facilities lease obligations, net of
estimated future sublease income, which are expected to be paid
through 2009. The payment of the restructuring costs for the
International segment was zero and $8,000 for the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. For the
North America segment, the Company paid restructuring costs of
$177,000 and $714,000 for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. In addition, a
$321,000 reserve reversal was recorded for the North America
segment during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. As
of October 31, 2007, the Company had a liability of $43,000
and zero for the North America segment and International
segment, respectively.
Activities related to the fiscal 2002 restructuring plan are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
|
|
|
Long-Term
|
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
1,200
|
|
|
$
|
60
|
|
|
$
|
1,260
|
|
|
$
|
765
|
|
|
$
|
495
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
(452
|
)
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(714
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(722
|
)
|
|
|
(722
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2006
|
|
|
486
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
546
|
|
|
|
503
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Reductions
|
|
|
(261
|
)
|
|
|
(60
|
)
|
|
|
(321
|
)
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
Payments
|
|
|
(182
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(182
|
)
|
|
|
(182
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GO
Software Restructuring Plan
In connection with the acquisition of the assets of the GO
Software business from Return on Investment Corporation on
March 1, 2005, the Company accrued in the purchase price
allocation $313,000 of restructuring costs related to the
integration of GO Softwares Savannah helpdesk facility
with the Companys helpdesk facility in Clearwater,
Florida. Payments against this liability of zero, $40,000, and
$229,000 were made during the fiscal
110
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
The restructuring activities have been completed and the unspent
reserve of $44,000 was reversed in the third quarter of fiscal
year 2007.
Fiscal
Year 2006 Restructuring Plan
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company
implemented a restructuring plan that established the Singapore
supply chain operations to leverage a favorable tax environment
and manufacturing operations in the Asia Pacific region
(fiscal 2006 restructuring plan). The plan included
reductions in workforce of employees in the United States,
Taiwan, Australia, and Hong Kong with an expected cost of
$591,000. For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006, the
Company paid restructuring costs of $345,000 and $238,000 in the
International and North American segments, respectively.
During the three months ended April 30, 2007, the Company
reversed the remaining reserve of $8,000. As of October 31,
2007, the restructuring activities have been completed.
Activities related to the fiscal 2006 restructuring plan are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
Short-Term
|
|
|
Long-Term
|
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
591
|
|
|
|
591
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(583
|
)
|
|
|
(583
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2006
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reductions
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PayWare
Restructuring Plan
In the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company completed
the acquisition of PayWare, the payment system business of
Trintech Group PLC. The Company developed a restructuring plan
and accrued restructuring costs related to a workforce reduction
and future facilities lease obligations which were included in
the purchase price allocation of PayWare. During the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company accrued and paid
$2.9 million and $0.5 million, respectively, for the
International segment. As of October 31, 2006, the Company
had a remaining liability of $2.4 million. During the
fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, the Company accrued and
paid $1.2 million and $2.8 million, respectively, for
the International segment. As of October 31, 2007, the
Company had a liability of $0.9 million for the
International segment.
Activities related to the PayWare acquisition restructuring plan
are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
|
|
|
Long-Term
|
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
1,645
|
|
|
|
1,148
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
2,869
|
|
|
|
2,869
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(411
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(461
|
)
|
|
|
(461
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,234
|
|
|
|
1,098
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
2,408
|
|
|
|
2,408
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
592
|
|
|
|
544
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
1,241
|
|
|
|
1,241
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
(1,870
|
)
|
|
|
(729
|
)
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
(2,780
|
)
|
|
|
(2,780
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
(44
|
)
|
|
$
|
913
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
869
|
|
|
$
|
869
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Fiscal
Year 2007 Restructuring Plan
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, the Company
implemented a restructuring plan that included reductions in
workforce of employees in the United States, China, Hong Kong,
Mexico, and the Philippines with an expected cost of $822,000.
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, the Company
accrued and paid $727,000 and $713,000, respectively, in
restructuring costs in the North America segment. For the fiscal
year ended October 31, 2007, the Company accrued and paid
$95,000 and $93,000, respectively, in restructuring costs in the
International segment. As of October 31, 2007, the Company
had a liability of $14,000 for the North America segment and
$2,000 for the International segment.
Activities related to the fiscal year 2007 restructuring plan
are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
|
|
|
Long-Term
|
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
808
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
822
|
|
|
|
822
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
(794
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(806
|
)
|
|
|
(806
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
14
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lipman
Restructuring Plan
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, the Company completed
the acquisition of Lipman and formulated a restructuring plan.
The Company accrued into the purchase price allocation
restructuring costs related to reduction in workforce and future
facilities lease obligation. For the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, the Company accrued and paid
restructuring costs of $6.1 million and $5.3 million,
respectively, for the International segment. For the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007, the Company accrued and paid
restructuring costs of $0.5 million and $0.5 million,
respectively, for the North America segment. As of
October 31, 2007, the Company had a liability of
$0.8 million for the International segment.
Activities related to the Lipman acquisition restructuring plan
are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
|
|
|
Long-Term
|
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Portion
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
3,479
|
|
|
|
3,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,570
|
|
|
|
4,075
|
|
|
|
2,495
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
(2,849
|
)
|
|
|
(2,952
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,801
|
)
|
|
|
(3,306
|
)
|
|
|
(2,495
|
)
|
Foreign exchange impact
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at October 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
647
|
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
786
|
|
|
$
|
786
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All
Restructuring Plans
At October 31, 2007 and 2006, $1.7 million and
$3.0 million, respectively, of the restructuring liability
was included in other current liabilities and $22,000 and
$43,000, respectively, was included in other long-term
liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
Note 9. Employee
Benefit Plans
The Company maintains a defined contribution 401(k) plan that
allows eligible employees to contribute up to 60% of their
pretax salary up to the maximum allowed under Internal Revenue
Service regulations. Discretionary employer matching
contributions of $2.0 million, $1.9 million, and
$1.8 million were made to the plan during the fiscal years
ended October 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.
112
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 10. Net
Income (Loss) per Share of Common Stock
Basic net income (loss) per share of common stock is computed by
dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of
shares of common stock outstanding for the period, less the
weighted average number of shares of common stock subject to
repurchase. Diluted net income (loss) per share of common stock
is computed using the weighted average number of shares of
common stock outstanding plus the effect of common stock
equivalents, unless the common stock equivalents are
anti-dilutive. The potential dilutive shares of the
Companys common stock resulting from the assumed exercise
of outstanding stock options and equivalents and the assumed
exercise of the warrants relating to the convertible senior
notes and the dilutive effect of the senior convertible notes
are determined using the treasury stock method.
The following details the computation of income (loss) per share
of common stock (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(34,016
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,511
|
|
|
$
|
33,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares of voting and non-voting common stock
outstanding
|
|
|
82,862
|
|
|
|
67,887
|
|
|
|
60,989
|
|
Less: weighted average number of shares subject to repurchase
|
|
|
(668
|
)
|
|
|
(1,670
|
)
|
|
|
(2,671
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing basic net income
(loss) per share
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
66,217
|
|
|
|
58,318
|
|
Add dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares subject to repurchase
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,670
|
|
|
|
2,671
|
|
Stock options and restricted stock units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,007
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of shares used in computing diluted net
income (loss) per share
|
|
|
82,194
|
|
|
|
68,894
|
|
|
|
61,460
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.41
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, options and
restricted stock units to purchase 9,081,387, 2,681,470, and
250,500 shares of common stock were excluded from the
calculation of weighted average shares for diluted net income
(loss) per share as they were anti-dilutive.
The senior convertible notes are considered to be Instrument C
securities as defined by
EITF 90-19,
Convertible Bonds with Issuer Option to Settle for Cash upon
Conversion; therefore, only the conversion spread relating
to the senior convertible notes is included in the
Companys diluted earnings per share calculation, if
dilutive. The potential dilutive shares of the Companys
common stock resulting from the assumed settlement of the
conversion spread of the senior convertible notes are determined
under the method set forth in
EITF 90-19.
Under such method, the settlement of the conversion spread of
the senior convertible notes has a dilutive effect when the
average share price of the Companys common stock during
the period exceeds $44.02. The average share price of the
Companys common stock during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 did not exceed $44.02.
113
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Warrants to purchase 7.2 million shares of the
Companys common stock were outstanding at October 31,
2007, but were not included in the computation of diluted
earnings per share because the warrants exercise price was
greater than the average market price of the Companys
common stock during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007;
therefore, their effect was anti-dilutive.
|
|
Note 11.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Commitments
The Company leases certain real and personal property under
noncancelable operating leases. Additionally, the Company
subleases certain real property to third parties. Future minimum
lease payments and sublease rental income under these leases as
of October 31, 2007, were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum Lease
|
|
|
Sublease Rental
|
|
|
Net Minimum
|
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Lease Payments
|
|
|
Year ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
10,417
|
|
|
$
|
161
|
|
|
$
|
10,256
|
|
2009
|
|
|
7,994
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
7,901
|
|
2010
|
|
|
7,118
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
7,114
|
|
2011
|
|
|
5,718
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,718
|
|
2012
|
|
|
5,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,196
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
11,092
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,092
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
47,535
|
|
|
$
|
258
|
|
|
$
|
47,277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certain leases require the Company to pay property taxes,
insurance, and routine maintenance and include rent escalation
clauses and options to extend the term of certain leases. Rent
expense was approximately $14.9 million, $9.2 million,
and $7.7 million for the fiscal years ended
October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Sublease
rental income was approximately $201,000, $315,000, and $147,000
for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and
2005, respectively.
Contingencies
Manufacturing
Agreements
The Company works on a purchase order basis with third-party
contract manufacturers and component suppliers with facilities
in China, Singapore, Israel, and Brazil to supply a majority of
the Companys inventories. The Company issues a forecast to
the third-party contract manufacturers and subsequently agrees
to a build schedule to drive component material purchases and
capacity planning. The Company provides each manufacturer with a
purchase order to cover the manufacturing requirements, which
constitutes a binding commitment by the Company to purchase
materials produced by the manufacturer as specified in the
purchase order. The total amount of purchase commitments as of
October 31, 2007 and 2006 was approximately
$47.4 million and $17.9 million, respectively, and are
generally paid within one year. Of this amount,
$4.4 million and $1.4 million has been recorded in
accrued expenses in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets
as of October 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, because the
commitment is not expected to have future value to the Company.
Employee
Health and Dental Costs
The Company is primarily self-insured for employee health and
dental costs, but has stop-loss insurance coverage to limit
per-incident liability. The Company believes that adequate
accruals are maintained to cover the retained liability. The
accrual for self-insurance is determined based on claims filed
and an estimate of claims incurred but not yet reported.
114
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Brazilian
State Tax Assessments
One of the Companys Brazilian subsidiaries has been
notified of a tax assessment regarding Brazilian state value
added tax (VAT), for the periods from January 2000
to December 2001 that relates to products supplied to the
Company by a contract manufacturer. The assessment relates to an
asserted deficiency of 8.3 million Brazilian reais
(approximately $4.7 million) including interest and
penalties. The tax assessment was based on a clerical error in
which the Companys Brazilian subsidiary omitted the
required tax exemption number on its invoices. Management does
not expect that the Company will ultimately incur a material
liability in respect of this assessment, because they believe,
based in part on advice of the Companys Brazilian tax
counsel, that the Company is likely to prevail in the
proceedings relating to this assessment. On May 25, 2005,
the Company had an administrative hearing with respect to this
audit. Management expects to receive the decision of the
administrative body sometime in 2008. In the event the Company
receives an adverse ruling from the administrative body, the
Company will decide whether or not to appeal and would reexamine
the determination as to whether an accrual is necessary. It is
currently uncertain what impact this state tax examination may
have with respect to the Companys use of a corresponding
exemption to reduce the Brazilian federal VAT.
Two of the Companys Brazilian subsidiaries that were
acquired as a part of the Lipman acquisition have been notified
of assessments regarding Brazilian customs penalties that relate
to alleged infractions in the importation of goods. The
assessments were issued by the Federal Revenue Department in the
City of Vitória, the City of São Paulo, and the City
of Itajai. The assessments relate to asserted deficiencies
totaling 26.9 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$15.3 million) excluding interest. The tax authorities
allege that the structure used for the importation of goods was
simulated with the objective of evading taxes levied on the
importation by under-invoicing the imported goods; the tax
authorities allege that the simulation was created through a
fraudulent interposition of parties, where the real sellers and
buyers of the imported goods were hidden.
In the Vitória tax assessment, the fines were reduced from
4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$2.7 million) to 1.5 million Brazilian reais
(approximately $0.8 million) on a first level
administrative decision on January 26, 2007. The proceeding
has been remitted to the Taxpayers Council to adjudicate the
appeal of the first level administrative decision filed by the
tax authorities. The Company also appealed the first level
administrative decision on February 26, 2007. In this
appeal, the Company argued that the tax authorities did not have
enough evidence to determine that the import transactions were
indeed fraudulent and that, even if there were some
irregularities in such importations, they could not be deemed to
be the Companys responsibility since all the transactions
were performed by the third-party importer of the goods.
Management expects to receive the decision of the Taxpayers
Council sometime in 2008. In the event the Company receives an
adverse ruling from the Taxpayers Council, the Company will
decide whether or not to appeal to the judicial level. Based on
the Companys current understanding of the underlying
facts, the Company believes that it is probable that its
Brazilian subsidiary will be required to pay some amount of
fines. At October 31, 2007, the Company has accrued
4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately
$2.7 million), excluding interest, which it believes is the
probable payment.
On July 12, 2007, the Company was notified of a first
administrative level decision rendered in the São Paulo tax
assessment, which maintained the total fine of 20.2 million
Brazilian reais (approximately $11.5 million) imposed. On
August 10, 2007, the Company appealed the first
administrative level decision to the Taxpayers Council. A
hearing was held on August 12, 2008 before the Taxpayers
Council, but the Taxpayers Council did not render a decision
pending its further review of the records. Management expects to
receive the decision of the Taxpayers Council sometime in 2008.
In the event the Company receives an adverse ruling from the
Taxpayers Council, the Company will decide whether or not to
appeal to the judicial level. Based on the Companys
current understanding of the underlying facts, the Company
believes that it is probable that its Brazilian subsidiary will
be required to pay some amount of fines. Accordingly, at
October 31, 2007, the Company has accrued 20.2 million
Brazilian reais (approximately $11.5 million), excluding
interest.
On May 22, 2008, the Company was notified of a first
administrative level decision rendered in the Itajai assessment,
which maintained the total fine of 2.0 million Brazilian
reais (approximately $1.1 million) imposed,
115
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
excluding interest. On May 27, 2008, the Company appealed
the first level administrative level decision to the Taxpayers
Council. Based on the Companys current understanding of
the underlying facts, the Company believes that it is probable
that its Brazilian subsidiary will be required to pay some
amount of fines. Accordingly, at October 31, 2007, the
Company has accrued 2.0 million Brazilian reais
(approximately $1.1 million), excluding interest.
Department
of Justice Investigation
On December 11, 2006, the Company received a civil
investigative demand from the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ) regarding an investigation into its
acquisition of Lipman which requests certain documents and other
information, principally with respect to the Companys
integration plans and communications prior to the completion of
this acquisition. The Company produced documents and certain
current and former employees provided information to a
representative of the DOJ in response to this request. The
Company is not aware of any violations in connection with the
matters that are the subject of the investigation. On
June 20, 2008, the Companys counsel received written
confirmation from the DOJ that it had closed this investigation.
Patent
Infringement Lawsuits
On September 18, 2007, SPA Syspatronic AG (SPA)
commenced an action in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against the
Company and others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent
No. 5,093,862 purportedly owned by SPA. The plaintiff is
seeking a judgment of infringement, an injunction against
further infringement, damages, interest and attorneys
fees. The Company filed an answer and counterclaims on
November 8, 2007, and intends to vigorously defend this
litigation. On January 28, 2008, the Company requested that
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the PTO)
perform a re-examination of the patent. The PTO granted the
request on April 4, 2008. The Company then filed a motion
to stay the proceedings with the Court and on April 25,
2008, the Court agreed to stay the proceedings pending the
re-examination. The case is still in the preliminary stages, and
it is not possible to quantify the extent of the Companys
potential liability, if any. An unfavorable outcome could have a
material adverse effect on the Companys business,
financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow.
On March 6, 2008, Cardsoft, Inc. and Cardsoft (Assignment
for the Benefit of Creditors), LLC (Cardsoft)
commenced an action in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against the
Company and others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents
No. 6,934,945 and No. 7,302,683 purportedly owned by
Cardsoft. The plaintiff is seeking a judgment of infringement,
an injunction against further infringement, damages, interest
and attorneys fees. The Company intends to vigorously
defend this litigation. The case is still in the preliminary
stages, and it is not possible to quantify the extent of the
Companys potential liability, if any. An unfavorable
outcome could have a material adverse effect on the
Companys business, financial condition, results of
operations, and cash flow.
Class Action
and Derivative Lawsuits
On or after December 4, 2007, several securities class
action claims were filed against the Company and certain of the
Companys officers. The various complaints specify
different class periods, with the longest proposed class period
being August 31, 2006 through December 3, 2007. These
lawsuits have been consolidated in the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California as In re VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation,
C 07-6140
MHP. The original actions were: Eichenholtz v.
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6140 MHP;
Lien v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6195 JSW;
Vaughn et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6197 VRW
(Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this complaint on
March 7, 2008); Feldman et al. v. VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6218 MMC;
Cerini v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6228 SC;
Westend Capital Management LLC v. VeriFone Holdings,
Inc. et al., C
07-6237 MMC;
Hill v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6238 MHP;
Offutt v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C
07-6241 JSW;
Feitel v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al., C
08-0118 CW.
On
116
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
March 17, 2008, the Court held a hearing on
Plaintiffs motions for Lead Plaintiff and Lead Counsel and
in May 2008, the Court requested additional briefing on these
matters, which was submitted in June 2008. The Company currently
expects that following the Courts order appointing Lead
Plaintiff and Lead Counsel, a Consolidated Complaint will be
filed. Each of the consolidated actions alleges, among other
things, violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
Rule 10b-5
thereunder, based on allegations that the Company and the
individual defendants made false or misleading public statements
regarding the Companys business and operations during the
putative class periods and seeks unspecified monetary damages
and other relief. At this time, the Company has not recorded any
liabilities as the Company is unable to estimate any potential
liability.
Beginning on December 13, 2007, several derivative actions
were also filed against certain current and former directors and
officers. These derivative lawsuits were filed in: (1) the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California, as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Shareholder
Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. C
07-6347,
which consolidates King v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 07-CV-6347),
Hilborn v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al. (Case
No. 08-CV-1132),
Patel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 08-CV-1133),
and Lemmond, et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al.
(Case
No. 08-CV-1301);
and (2) California Superior Court, Santa Clara County,
as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Derivative Litigation,
Lead Case
No. 1-07-CV-100980,
which consolidates Catholic Medical Mission Board v.
Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 1-07-CV-100980),
and Carpel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case
No. 1-07-CV-101449).
The complaints allege, among other things, that certain of the
Companys current and former directors and officers
breached their fiduciary duties to the Company and violated
provisions of the California Corporations Code and certain
common law doctrines by engaging in alleged wrongful conduct
complained of in the securities class action litigation
described above. The Company is named solely as a nominal
defendant against whom the plaintiffs seek no recovery. Amended
consolidated complaints are expected to be filed in September
2008 in each set of consolidated cases.
On January 27, 2008, a class action complaint was filed
against the Company in the Central District Court in Tel Aviv,
Israel on behalf of purchasers of the Companys stock on
the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. The complaint seeks compensation
for damages allegedly incurred by the class of plaintiffs due to
the publication of erroneous financial reports. On May 25,
2008, the Court held a hearing on the Companys motion to
dismiss or stay the proceedings, after which the Court requested
that the plaintiff and the Company submit additional information
to the Court with respect to the applicability of Israeli law to
dually registered companies. This additional information was
submitted to the Court in June 2008, and the parties are
currently awaiting the Courts ruling on this issue. At
this time, the Company has not recorded any liabilities as it is
unable to estimate any potential liability.
The foregoing cases are still in the preliminary stages, and the
Company is not able to quantify the extent of its potential
liability, if any. An unfavorable outcome in any of these
matters could have a material adverse effect on the
Companys business, financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows. In addition, defending this
litigation is likely to be costly and may divert
managements attention from the day-to-day operations of
the Companys business.
Regulatory
Actions
The Company has responded to inquiries and provided information
and documents related to the restatement of its fiscal year 2007
interim financial statements to the Securities and Exchange
Commission, the Department of Justice, the New York Stock
Exchange and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The SEC has
also expressed an interest in interviewing several current and
former officers and employees of the Company, and the Company is
continuing to cooperate with the SEC in responding to the
SECs requests for information. The Company is unable to
predict what consequences, if any, any investigation by any
regulatory agency may have on the Company. There is no assurance
that other regulatory inquiries will not be commenced by other
U.S. federal, state or foreign regulatory agencies.
117
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Other
Litigation
The Company is subject to various other legal proceedings
related to commercial, customer, and employment matters that
have arisen during the ordinary course of its business. Although
there can be no assurance as to the ultimate disposition of
these matters, the Companys management has determined,
based upon the information available at the date of these
financial statements, that the expected outcome of these
matters, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a
material adverse effect on the Companys consolidated
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
|
|
Note 12.
|
Related-Party
Transactions
|
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005, the Company
recorded $125,000 of management fees payable to GTCR Golder
Rauner, L.L.C., an affiliate of a stockholder. These fees are
included in general and administrative expenses in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. Upon the
closing of the Companys public offering, the management
fees ceased.
In June 2004, the Company paid a placement fee of
$2.9 million to GTCR Golder Rauner, L.L.C., for services
related to the credit facility acquired from Banc of America
Securities and Credit Suisse First Boston. The debt issuance
costs were amortized over the term of the related debt. The
Company recorded amortization of debt issuance costs related to
these costs of $276,000, and $282,000, respectively, for the
fiscal years ended October 31, 2006 and 2005, which is
included in interest expense in the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations. For the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2005, the Company made prepayments on the
credit facility and $712,000 of the unamortized debt issuances
related to the placement fee was written off. On
October 31, 2006, the Company entered into a new secured
credit facility with a syndicate of financial institutions, led
by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Lehman Commercial Paper Inc.
The proceeds were used to repay the outstanding amounts due from
the existing secured credit facility, pay the transaction costs,
and fund the cash consideration in connection with the
acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006. The Company
wrote off the remaining balance of unamortized debt issuance
cost of the credit facility acquired from Banc of America
Securities and Credit Suisse First Boston in the amount of
$6.4 million in October 2006 of which $1.6 million
related to the placement fee with GTCR Golden Rauner, L.L.C.
For the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and
2005, respectively, the Company recorded purchases from
affiliates of related parties of $158,000, zero and $152,000 in
connection with goods or services they provided or arranged.
These purchases are included in general and administrative
expenses in the accompanying statements of operations. As of
October 31, 2007, the Company has an outstanding accounts
payable balance of $27,000 related to these purchases.
For the years ended October 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005,
respectively, the Company recorded sales to affiliates of
related parties of $11.9 million, $7.8 million, and
zero, respectively. Sales to Global Payments were
$11.2 million and $5.4 million, respectively, for the
years ended October 31, 2007 and 2006. Global Payments is
considered a related party since Alex W. Pete Hart
is a director of both Global Payments and VeriFone. These sales
are included in System Solutions net revenues in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. As of
October 31, 2007, the Company has an outstanding accounts
receivable balance of $3.3 million related to these sales.
|
|
Note 13.
|
Segment
and Geographic Information
|
The Company is primarily structured in a geographic manner. The
Companys Chief Executive Officer is identified as the
Chief Operating Decision Maker (CODM) as defined by
SFAS No. 131, Disclosures About Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information. The CODM reviews
consolidated financial information on revenues and gross profit
percentage for System Solutions and Services. The CODM also
reviews operating expenses, certain of which are allocated to
the Companys two segments described below.
118
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Segment
Information
The Company operates in two business segments: North America and
International. The Company defines North America as the United
States and Canada, and International as the countries in which
it makes sales outside the United States and Canada. Total
assets and long-lived assets by segment are based on the
physical location of the assets.
Net revenues and operating income of each business segment
reflect net revenues generated within the segment, standard cost
of System Solutions net revenues, actual cost of Services net
revenues, and expenses that directly benefit only that segment.
Corporate net revenues and operating income (loss) reflect
non-cash acquisition charges, including amortization of
purchased core and developed technology assets,
step-up of
inventory and step-down in deferred revenue, and other Corporate
charges, including inventory obsolescence and scrap at corporate
distribution centers, rework, specific warranty provisions,
non-standard freight,
over-and-under
absorption of materials management, and supply chain engineering
overhead. Corporate loss also reflects the difference between
the actual and standard cost of System Solutions net revenues
and shared operating costs that benefit both segments,
predominately research and development expenses and centralized
supply chain management.
The following table sets forth net revenues and operating income
for the Companys segments (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
400,433
|
|
|
$
|
333,673
|
|
|
$
|
289,720
|
|
International
|
|
|
506,195
|
|
|
|
248,383
|
|
|
|
196,347
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
(3,736
|
)
|
|
|
(986
|
)
|
|
|
(700
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
$
|
902,892
|
|
|
$
|
581,070
|
|
|
$
|
485,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
156,562
|
|
|
$
|
129,358
|
|
|
$
|
104,867
|
|
International
|
|
|
110,795
|
|
|
|
60,965
|
|
|
|
37,375
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
(238,877
|
)
|
|
|
(82,014
|
)
|
|
|
(74,054
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income
|
|
$
|
28,480
|
|
|
$
|
108,309
|
|
|
$
|
68,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys long-lived assets which consist primarily of
property, plant and equipment, net by segment were as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
26,549
|
|
|
$
|
6,270
|
|
International
|
|
|
24,271
|
|
|
|
3,277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
50,820
|
|
|
$
|
9,547
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys goodwill by segment was as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
International
|
|
$
|
542,186
|
|
|
$
|
19,102
|
|
North America
|
|
|
69,791
|
|
|
|
33,587
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
611,977
|
|
|
$
|
52,689
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119
VERIFONE
HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Companys total assets by segment were as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
International
|
|
$
|
1,122,411
|
|
|
$
|
125,681
|
|
North America
|
|
|
424,898
|
|
|
|
327,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,547,309
|
|
|
$
|
452,945
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys depreciation and amortization expense by
segment was as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
International
|
|
$
|
4,738
|
|
|
$
|
900
|
|
|
$
|
338
|
|
North America
|
|
|
3,028
|
|
|
|
2,605
|
|
|
|
3,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,766
|
|
|
$
|
3,505
|
|
|
$
|
3,691
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geographic
Information
The Companys revenues by geographic area were as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
355,222
|
|
|
$
|
315,851
|
|
|
$
|
280,126
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
281,628
|
|
|
|
108,889
|
|
|
|
88,995
|
|
Latin America
|
|
|
160,867
|
|
|
|
104,225
|
|
|
|
71,265
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
63,700
|
|
|
|
35,269
|
|
|
|
36,087
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
41,475
|
|
|
|
16,836
|
|
|
|
8,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
902,892
|
|
|
$
|
581,070
|
|
|
$
|
485,367
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues are allocated to the geographic areas based on the
shipping destination of customer orders. Corporate revenues are
included in the United States geographic area revenues.
The Companys long-lived assets, exclusive of intercompany
accounts, were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
26,549
|
|
|
$
|
6,409
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
20,694
|
|
|
|
2,191
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
2,160
|
|
|
|
270
|
|
Latin America
|
|
|
1,417
|
|
|
|
677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
50,820
|
|
|
$
|
9,547
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
|
There were no changes in or disagreements with accountants on
accounting and financial disclosure during the last two fiscal
years.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
VeriFone maintains disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act)), that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in the reports that we file
or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed,
summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in
Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms, and that
such information is accumulated and communicated to our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
our disclosure controls and procedures. Our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer participated with our
management in evaluating the effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures as of October 31, 2007.
Based on our managements evaluation (with the
participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer), our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer have concluded that, as of October 31, 2007, in
light of the material weaknesses described below, our disclosure
controls and procedures were not effective to provide reasonable
assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in
the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is
recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time
periods specified in the SECs rules and forms, and that
such information is accumulated and communicated to our
management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
Notwithstanding the material weaknesses described below, we have
performed additional analyses and other procedures to enable
management to conclude that our consolidated financial
statements included in this report were prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America (US GAAP). Based in part on
these additional efforts, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer have included their certifications as exhibits
to this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f),
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with US GAAP. Under the
supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the design and
operational effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting as of October 31, 2007 based on the framework in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO).
Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, does not expect our disclosure controls or
our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or
detect all errors or all fraud. A control system, no matter how
well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not
absolute, assurance that the control systems objectives
will be met. The design of a control system must reflect the
fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Further,
because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no
evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that
misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all
control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the
company have been detected. These inherent limitations include
the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty
and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or
mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual
acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by
management override of the controls.
121
The design of any system of controls is based in part on certain
assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can
be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its
stated goals under all potential future conditions. Projections
of any evaluation of controls effectiveness to future periods
are subject to risks. Over time, controls may become inadequate
because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree
of compliance with policies or procedures.
A material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of
control deficiencies, in internal control over financial
reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of the annual or interim financial
statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
Managements assessment identified the following material
weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as
of October 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
A transaction-level material weakness in the design and
operation of control activities relating to the preparation,
review, approval, and entry of manual, non-standard, journal
entries. This material weakness contributed to adjustments in
several accounts and the restatement of the interim condensed
consolidated financial statements for the quarterly periods
during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. The accounts
most affected in the restatement included inventories and cost
of net revenues; however, this material weakness could impact
all financial statement accounts.
|
|
|
|
An entity-level material weakness in the control environment
related to our period-end financial reporting process due to an
insufficient number of qualified personnel with the required
proficiency to apply our accounting policies in accordance with
U.S. GAAP following the November 1, 2006 acquisition
of Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. This material weakness
contributed to adjustments in several accounts and the
restatement of the interim condensed consolidated financial
statements for the quarterly periods during the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007. The accounts most affected in the
restatement include inventories and cost of net revenues;
however, this material weakness could impact all financial
statement accounts, with a higher likelihood for accounts
subject to non-routine or estimation processes, such as
inventory reserves and income taxes.
|
|
|
|
An entity-level material weakness in control activities related
to the design and operation of our supervision, monitoring, and
monthly financial statement review processes. This material
weakness contributed to adjustments in several accounts and the
restatement of the interim condensed consolidated financial
statements for the quarterly periods during the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007. The accounts most affected in the
restatement included inventories and cost of net revenues;
however, this material weakness could impact all financial
statement accounts.
|
|
|
|
A transaction-level material weakness in the design and
operating effectiveness of controls related to income taxes.
Specifically, our processes and procedures were not designed to
provide for adequate and timely identification, documentation
and review of various income tax calculations, reconciliations
and related supporting documentation required to apply our
accounting policy for income taxes in accordance with
U.S. GAAP, particularly following the November 1, 2006
acquisition of Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. This material
weakness impacted our ability to report financial information
related to income tax accounts and resulted in adjustments to
income tax expense, income taxes payable, deferred tax assets
and liabilities, and goodwill accounts during the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007.
|
As a result of the identified material weaknesses, our
management concluded that, as of October 31, 2007, our
internal control over financial reporting was not effective. The
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
as of October 31, 2007 was audited by Ernst &
Young LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm as
stated in their report, which report is included in Item 8
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Managements
Remediation Initiatives
Following the independent investigation (see
Item 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Restatement and Audit Committee
Investigation) by the Audit Committee
122
and in response to the material weaknesses discussed above, we
plan to continue the efforts already underway to review and make
necessary changes to improve our internal control over financial
reporting, including:
|
|
|
|
|
We have enhanced our manual journal entry policy, including a
more stringent manual journal entry review and approval process
that requires tiered approval levels in which escalating dollar
amounts require additional approval by increasingly more senior
personnel;
|
|
|
|
We migrated to a new worldwide, integrated, enterprise resource
planning (ERP) system. The new ERP system is our
principle computing platform and provides for a single unified
chart of accounts worldwide. This system was activated for the
majority of our worldwide operations in the first fiscal quarter
of 2008 and by the end of the second fiscal quarter of 2008 over
90% of our consolidated net revenues and cost of net revenues
were processed on this system;
|
|
|
|
We have added and expect to continue to add qualified accounting
and finance personnel having sufficient knowledge and experience
in general accepted accounting principles, cost accounting, tax,
and management of financial systems;
|
|
|
|
We intend to enhance our review process over the monthly
financial results by requiring additional documentation and
analysis to be provided that will then be reviewed by
appropriate key senior personnel from both finance and
non-finance areas;
|
|
|
|
We expect to enhance the segregation of duties between the
financial planning and the accounting and control
functions; and
|
|
|
|
We intend to enhance our governance and compliance functions to
improve control consciousness and prevention of errors in
financial reporting, as well as to improve tone, communication,
education, and training for employees involved in the financial
reporting process, including the appointment of a chief legal
and compliance officer.
|
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in our internal control over
financial reporting that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting for the three months ended
October 31, 2007.
|
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
We have no information to report pursuant to Item 9B.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
|
Directors
The board of directors has eight members. The names and ages of
our directors are set forth below:
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
|
47
|
|
Dr. James C. Castle
|
|
|
71
|
|
Dr. Leslie G. Denend
|
|
|
66
|
|
Alex W. (Pete) Hart
|
|
|
68
|
|
Robert B. Henske
|
|
|
47
|
|
Eitan Raff
|
|
|
67
|
|
Charles R. Rinehart
|
|
|
61
|
|
Collin E. Roche
|
|
|
37
|
|
123
Certain biographical information regarding our directors,
including the date that they were first elected to our board of
directors, is set forth below:
Douglas G. Bergeron. Mr. Bergeron has served as
Chief Executive Officer of VeriFone Holdings, Inc. since July
2001. From December 2000 to June 2002, Mr. Bergeron was
Group President of Gores Technology Group and, from April 1999
to October 2000 served as President and Chief Executive Officer
of Geac Computer Corporation. From 1990 to 1999,
Mr. Bergeron served in a variety of executive management
positions at SunGard Data Systems Inc., including Group CEO of
SunGard Brokerage Systems Group and President of SunGard Futures
Systems. Mr. Bergeron holds a Bachelor of Arts degree (with
Honors) in computer science from York University in Toronto,
Canada, and a Masters of Science degree from the University of
Southern California. Mr. Bergeron is on the board of the
Multiple Sclerosis Society of Silicon Valley and is a member of
the Listed Company Advisory Committee of the NYSE.
James C. Castle. Dr. Castle has served as a director
since January 2005. Since 2001, Dr. Castle has been
President and Chief Executive Officer of Castle Information
Technologies, LLC, a provider of information technology and
board of directors consulting services. He was formerly the
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of DST Systems
of California, Inc. (formerly USCS International, Inc.), a
position he held from August 1992 to April 2002. DST Systems of
California is a worldwide provider of computer services to the
cable industry and a provider of billing services to the cable,
telephony, financial services, and utility industries. From 1991
to 1992, Dr. Castle was President and Chief Executive
Officer of Teradata Corporation, until that company merged with
NCR Corporation, a subsidiary of AT&T. From 1987 to 1991,
Dr. Castle was Chairman of the Board, President, Chief
Executive Officer and a director of Infotron Systems
Corporation. Dr. Castle earned a Ph.D. in computer and
information sciences from the University of Pennsylvania, an
M.S.E.E. from the University of Pennsylvania, and a B.S. from
the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.
Leslie G. Denend. Dr. Denend has served as a
director since January 2005. Dr. Denend was President of
Network Associates, Inc. from December 1997 until May 1998.
Since 1998, Dr. Denend has served on the boards of numerous
public and private companies. Dr. Denend also was President
and CEO of Network General Corporation from February 1993 until
December 1997 and Chairman, President, and CEO of Vitalink
Communications Corporation from October 1990 until its
acquisition by Network Systems Corp. in June 1991.
Dr. Denend remained as a business unit president at Network
Systems Corp. until December 1992. He was Executive Vice
President at 3Com Corporation from January 1989 until October
1990. He was also a partner in McKinsey and Company from
December 1984 until January 1989. Dr. Denend served as
Executive Assistant to the Executive Director of the Council on
International Economic Policy in the Executive Office of the
President from August 1974 until August 1975, as a member of the
National Security Council Staff from June 1977 until 1979, when
he became the Special Assistant to the Assistant to the
President for National Security Affairs, until January 1981.
Dr. Denend also served as Deputy Director of the Cabinet
Council on Economic Affairs from May 1982 until June 1983.
Dr. Denend earned a Ph.D. and an M.B.A. from Stanford
University and a B.S. from the U.S. Air Force Academy. He
also currently serves as a director of McAfee, Inc., a supplier
of computer security solutions.
Alex W. (Pete) Hart. Mr. Hart has served as a
director since July 2006. Mr. Hart is currently Chairman of
the Board and a director of SVB Financial Corp. Mr. Hart
has been an independent consultant to the financial services
industry since November 1997. From August 1995 to November 1997,
he served as Chief Executive Officer and from March 1994 to
August 1996, as Executive Vice Chairman, of Advanta Corporation,
a diversified financial services company. From 1988 to 1994, he
was President and Chief Executive Officer of MasterCard
International, the worldwide payment service provider.
Mr. Hart holds a bachelors degree in social relations
from Harvard University. He is currently a member of the boards
of directors of Fair Isaac Corporation, a predictive software
company (since 2002), Global Payments, Inc., a payment services
company (since 2001), and eharmony.com, an online compatibility
service (since 2004).
Robert B. Henske. Mr. Henske has served as a
director since January 2005. Mr. Henske has served as a
Managing Director of Hellman & Friedman LLC since July
2007. From May 2005 until July 2007, he served as Senior Vice
President and General Manager of the Consumer Tax Group of
Intuit Inc. He was Intuits Chief Financial Officer from
January 2003 to September 2005. Prior to joining Intuit, he
served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
Synopsys, Inc., a supplier of electronic design automation
software, from May 2000
124
until January 2003. From January 1997 to May 2000,
Mr. Henske was at Oak Hill Capital Management, a Robert M.
Bass Group private equity investment firm, where he was a
partner. Mr. Henske also serves as chairman of the board of
directors of Activant Solutions, Inc. and as a director of
Goodman Global Inc. Mr. Henske was previously a member of
the board of directors of Williams Scotsman, Grove Worldwide,
Reliant Building Products and American Savings Bank.
Eitan Raff. Mr. Raff has served as a director since
October 2007. Mr. Raff has been the chairman of the board
of directors of Bank Leumi le-Israel B.M. since 1995.
Mr. Raff is also the Chairman of the Management Committee
of Hebrew University of Jerusalem and previously served as the
Accountant General (Treasurer) in the Israeli Ministry of
Finance. Mr. Raff holds a B.A. and M.B.A. from the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem. Bank Leumi is a party to our bank
credit agreement and the aggregate outstanding loan and
revolving credit commitment from Bank Leumi to us is less than
$10 million.
Charles R. Rinehart. Mr. Rinehart has served as a
director since May 2006 and as our non-executive Chairman since
March 2008. Mr. Rinehart retired from HF
Ahmanson & Co. and its principal subsidiary, Home
Savings of America in 1998. Mr. Rinehart joined HF Ahmanson
in 1989 and shortly thereafter was named President and Chief
Operating Officer. He was named Chief Executive Officer in 1993
and also became Chairman in 1995 and served in these roles
through 1998. Mr. Rinehart is a director of Safeco Corp.
and has previously served as a director of Kaufman &
Broad Home Corporation, Union Bank of California, the Federal
Home Loan Board of San Francisco, and PacifiCare.
Mr. Rinehart holds a bachelors degree in mathematics
from the University of San Francisco.
Collin E. Roche. Mr. Roche has served as a director
since July 2002. Mr. Roche is currently a Principal of GTCR
Golder Rauner, L.L.C., which he joined in 1996 and rejoined in
2000 after receiving an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School.
Prior to joining GTCR, Mr. Roche worked as an investment
banking analyst at Goldman, Sachs & Co. and as an
associate at Everen Securities. He received a B.A. in political
economy from Williams College. Mr. Roche serves on the
boards of directors of Syniverse Holdings, Inc., a provider of
mission-critical technology services to wireless
telecommunications companies worldwide, Private Bancorp, Inc., a
financial institution providing various financial services to
individuals, professionals, entrepreneurs and real estate
investors, and several private GTCR portfolio companies.
Executive
Officers
The executive officers of VeriFone and their ages as of
March 31, 2008 were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Douglas Bergeron
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Integrated Solutions
|
Biographical information for Douglas Bergeron is set forth under
Directors above.
Barry Zwarenstein. Mr. Zwarenstein, our Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since November 2006,
joined VeriFone Holdings, Inc. in June 2004 as Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Zwarenstein
served as Chief Financial Officer of Iomega Corporation from
November 2001 to June 2004, of Mellanox Technologies
Limited from January 2001 to June 2001, of Acuson Corporation
from October 1998 to December 2000, and of Logitech S.A. from
July 1996 to September 1998. Mr. Zwarenstein started his
career at FMC Corporation, where he held a variety of financial
positions, including, at the time of his departure, Chief
Financial Officer for FMC Europe in Brussels, Belgium.
Mr. Zwarenstein is a Director and Chairman of the Audit
Committee of DealerTrack, Inc. Mr. Zwarenstein received a
Bachelor of Commerce degree from the University of Natal, South
Africa and an M.B.A. from the Wharton School of Business at the
University of Pennsylvania. He is qualified as a Chartered
Accountant (South Africa). Mr. Zwarenstein has tendered his
resignation as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer, which will become effective subsequent to the
completion of the restatement and filing of VeriFones
quarterly reports for fiscal year 2007 and the second quarter of
fiscal year 2008 as well as VeriFones fiscal year 2007
annual report with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
125
Elmore Waller. Mr. Waller has served as Executive
Vice President, Integrated Solutions since December 2004
and, since joining VeriFone in 1986, has served in a number of
leadership positions including Senior Vice President and General
Manager of the Worldwide Petro Division. Prior to working at
VeriFone, Mr. Waller worked for 11 years at General
Electric Company, serving in several financial management
positions. Mr. Waller holds an M.B.A. from Syracuse
University.
There are no family relationships among any directors or
executive officers of VeriFone.
Corporate
Governance Guidelines
Our Board has adopted corporate governance guidelines that
provide the framework for the corporate governance principles of
VeriFone. These corporate governance principles are reviewed
annually by our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee,
and changes are recommended to the Board for approval as
appropriate. Our corporate governance guidelines are available
on the Investor Relations section of our website,
http://ir.verifone.com/,
and are available in print to any stockholder who
requests it.
Code of
Business Conduct and Ethics
VeriFone has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics,
which can be found in the Investor Relations section of our
website,
http://ir.verifone.com/,
and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.
The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applies to all of
VeriFones employees, officers and directors. We will post
any amendments to or waivers from a provision of our Code of
Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to our principal
executive officer, principal financial officer, principal
accounting officer or controller or persons performing similar
functions and that relates to any element of the code of
ethics definition set forth in Item 406(b) of
Regulation S-K
of the SEC at
http://ir.verifone.com/.
Director
Attendance at Meetings
Although our Board recognizes that conflicts may occasionally
prevent a director from attending a Board or stockholder
meeting, the Board expects each director to make every possible
effort to keep such absences to a minimum. In fiscal year 2007,
the Board held eight meetings. During that period, each director
attended not less than 75% of the meetings of the Board and
committees of the Board on which the director served.
Executive
Sessions
Non-employee directors meet in executive session with no
management directors or employees present at each regularly
scheduled Board meeting. The presiding director at these
meetings is selected by the non-employee directors at the
relevant meeting. In the absence of such selection, the
presiding director will be the Chairman of the Compensation
Committee.
Communications
with Directors
Any interested party may direct communications to individual
directors, including the presiding director, to a board
committee, the independent directors as a group, or to the Board
as a whole, by addressing the communication to the named
individual, to the committee, the independent directors as a
group, or to the Board as a whole
c/o Secretary,
VeriFone Holdings, Inc., 2099 Gateway Place, Suite 600,
San Jose, CA, 95110. VeriFones Secretary or an
Assistant Secretary will review all communications so addressed
and will relay to the addressee(s) all communications determined
to relate to the business, management or governance of VeriFone.
Committees
of our Board of Directors
Our Board has an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and
a Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.
126
Audit
Committee
Our Board has a separately-designated standing Audit Committee
established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Our Board has
adopted an Audit Committee charter, which is available on the
Investor Relations section of our website at
http://ir.verifone.com/
and defines the Audit Committees purposes to include:
|
|
|
|
|
Overseeing the compensation for and supervising our independent
registered public accounting firm;
|
|
|
|
Reviewing our internal accounting procedures, systems of
internal controls, and financial statements;
|
|
|
|
Reviewing and approving the services provided by our internal
auditors and independent registered public accounting firm,
including the results and scope of their audits; and
|
|
|
|
Resolving disagreements between management and our independent
registered public accounting firm.
|
In fiscal year 2007, our Audit Committee met eight times, and
met in executive and private sessions at each such meeting with
external counsel and our independent registered public
accounting firm.
Our Board and our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
have determined that each member of the Audit Committee is
independent within the meaning of the rules of both
the NYSE and the SEC.
The report of the Audit Committee is included in this report
under Report of the Audit Committee.
Compensation
Committee
Our Board has adopted a Compensation Committee charter, which is
available on the Investor Relations section of our website at
http://ir.verifone.com
and defines the Compensation Committees purposes to
include:
|
|
|
|
|
Reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives relevant
to the compensation of VeriFones Chief Executive Officer
(CEO), evaluating the CEOs performance in
light of those goals and objectives and, either as a committee
or together with the other independent directors (as directed by
the Board), determining and approving the CEOs
compensation level based on this evaluation;
|
|
|
|
Making recommendations to the Board with respect to non-CEO
compensation, incentive compensation plans, and equity-based
plans, including the VeriFone Bonus Plan and the 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan, overseeing the activities of the individuals
responsible for administering these plans, and discharging any
responsibilities imposed on the Compensation Committee by any of
these plans;
|
|
|
|
Approving any new equity compensation plan or any material
change to an existing plan where stockholder approval has not
been obtained;
|
|
|
|
In consultation with management, overseeing regulatory
compliance with respect to compensation matters, including
overseeing VeriFones policies on structuring compensation
programs to preserve tax deductibility, and, as and when
required, establishing performance goals and certifying that
performance goals have been attained for purposes of
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code;
|
|
|
|
Making recommendations to the Board with respect to any
severance or similar termination payments proposed to be made to
any current or former officer of VeriFone; and
|
|
|
|
Preparing an annual Report of the Compensation Committee for
inclusion in our annual proxy statement.
|
In fiscal year 2007, our Compensation Committee met eight times,
and met in executive session at each such meeting.
Our Board of Directors and our Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee have determined that each member of the
Compensation Committee is independent within the
meaning of the rules of both the NYSE and the SEC.
The report of the Compensation Committee is included in this
report under Report of the Compensation Committee.
127
Corporate
Governance and Nominating Committee
Our Board of Directors has adopted a Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee charter, which is available on the Investor
Relations section of our website at
http://ir.verifone.com
and defines the Corporate Governance and Nominating
Committees purposes to include:
|
|
|
|
|
Making recommendations to the Board from time to time as to
changes that the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
believes to be desirable to the size of the Board or any
committee thereof;
|
|
|
|
Identifying individuals believed to be qualified to become Board
members, consistent with criteria approved by the Board, and
selecting, or recommending to the Board, the nominees to stand
for election as directors at the annual meeting of stockholders
or, if applicable, at a special meeting of stockholders;
|
|
|
|
Developing and recommending to the Board, standards to be
applied in making determinations as to the absence of material
relationships between VeriFone and a director;
|
|
|
|
Identifying Board members qualified to fill vacancies on any
committee of the Board (including the Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee) and recommending that the Board appoint
the identified member or members to the respective committee;
|
|
|
|
Establishing procedures for the Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee to exercise oversight of the evaluation of
the Board and management;
|
|
|
|
Developing and recommending to the Board a set of corporate
governance principles applicable to VeriFone and reviewing those
principles at least once a year; and
|
|
|
|
Assisting management in the preparation of the disclosure in
VeriFones annual proxy statement regarding the operations
of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.
|
The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has not
established specific minimum education, experience, or skill
requirements for potential members, but, in general, expects
that qualified candidates will have managerial experience in a
complex organization and will be able to represent the interests
of the stockholders as a whole. The Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee considers each candidates judgment,
skill, diversity, experience with businesses and other
organizations of comparable size, the interplay of the
candidates experience with the experience other Board
members, and the extent to which the candidate would be a
desirable addition to the Board and any committees of the Board.
In addition, each candidate must have the time and ability to
make a constructive contribution to the Board.
The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee have generally
identified nominees based upon suggestions by directors,
management, outside consultants, and stockholders. Members of
the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee discuss and
evaluate possible candidates in detail and suggest individuals
to explore in more depth. Once a candidate is identified for
serious consideration, the nominee is referred to the Board for
full Board consideration of the nominee. The Corporate
Governance and Nominating Committee will consider candidates
recommended by stockholders in the same manner as other
candidates. Stockholders may nominate candidates for director in
accordance with the advance notice and other procedures
contained in our Bylaws. In fiscal year 2007, our Corporate
Governance and Nominating Committee met five times, and met in
executive session at each such meeting.
Our Board of Directors and our Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee have determined that each member of the
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is
independent within the meaning of the rules of both
the NYSE and the SEC. In addition, our Board of Directors and
our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee made a
determination in 2007 that Mr. Craig Bondy, a former member
of our Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee whose
resignation from our Board of Directors was effective
October 1, 2007, was independent within the
meaning of the rules of both the NYSE and the SEC. The report of
the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is included in
this report under Report of the Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee.
128
Committee
Membership
The table below summarizes membership information for each of
the Board committees:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Governance and
|
|
|
Audit
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Nominating
|
Director
|
|
Committee
|
|
Committee
|
|
Committee
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James C. Castle(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
(Chairman)
|
Leslie G. Denend
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
(Chairman)
|
|
|
Alex W. (Pete) Hart(2)
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
Robert B. Henske
|
|
ü
(Chairman)
|
|
ü
|
|
|
Eitan Raff(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
Charles Rinehart
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
Collin E. Roche
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Dr. Castle resigned from the Audit Committee effective
June 11, 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Hart became a member of the Compensation Committee
effective May 10, 2008. |
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Raff became a member of the Corporate Governance and
Nominating Committee in October 2007. |
Audit
Committee Financial Expert
Our Board has determined that Robert B. Henske is qualified as
an Audit Committee financial expert within the meaning of SEC
regulations. In making this determination, the Board considered
the following qualifications: (a) understanding of
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP);
(b) ability to apply GAAP to accounting for estimates,
accruals, and reserves; (c) experience preparing, auditing,
analyzing, or evaluating financial statements that present a
breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are
generally comparable to the issues likely to be raised by our
financial statements, or experience actively supervising persons
engaged in these activities; (d) understanding of internal
control over financial reporting; and (e) understanding of
Audit Committee functions.
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires VeriFones
executive officers, directors and persons who own more than 10%
of VeriFones common stock, to file with the SEC initial
reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership of
common stock and other equity securities of VeriFone. The
officers, directors and 10% stockholders are required by SEC
regulations to furnish VeriFone with copies of all
Section 16(a) forms they file.
SEC regulations require us to identify in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
anyone who failed to file on a timely basis reports that were
due during the most recent fiscal year or, in certain cases,
prior years. Based on our review of reports we received, or
written representations from reporting persons stating that they
were not required to file these forms, we believe that, during
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, all
Section 16(a) filing requirements were satisfied on a
timely basis with the exception of the filing of two late
Form 4 filings by each of Mr. Angel and
Dr. Castle and one late Form 4 filing by each of
Mr. Bergeron and Mr. Zwarenstein.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
During fiscal year 2007, the Compensation Committee consisted of
Leslie G. Denend (Chair), Robert B. Henske, and Collin E. Roche.
None of the members is an officer or employee of VeriFone, and
none of our executive officers serves as a member of a board of
directors or compensation committee of any entity that has one
or more executive officers serving as a member of our Board or
Compensation Committee.
129
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
COMPENSATION
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
The following Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the
principles, policies, and practices that formed the foundation
of our compensation program in fiscal year 2007 and explains how
they applied to our named executive officers, who are our Chief
Executive Officer, Douglas G. Bergeron, our Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, Barry Zwarenstein, our
Executive Vice President, Integrated Systems, Elmore Waller, our
former Executive Vice President, Global Operations, Isaac Angel,
and our former Executive Vice President, Global Marketing and
Business Development, William G. Atkinson. We refer to these
executive officers as our named executives.
Compensation
Program
Objectives
We believe that highly talented, dedicated, and results-oriented
management is critical to our growth and long-term success. Our
compensation program, which is subject to the oversight of our
Board of Directors and its Compensation Committee, is designed
to:
|
|
|
|
|
Attract, motivate, and retain management talent of high quality;
|
|
|
|
Align our managements interests with those of our
stockholders by providing for a significant portion of
compensation in the form of stock options, restricted stock
units, and other stock-based awards the value of which depends
upon performance of our stock;
|
|
|
|
Tie each named executives compensation to our success
during the most recent fiscal year, measured in large part by
our financial performance and any increase in stockholder value
during that period;
|
|
|
|
Tie a portion of each named executives compensation to
that executives individual performance in supporting our
goals for the fiscal year, in order to encourage and reflect
individual contributions to our overall performance by rewarding
individual achievement;
|
|
|
|
Ensure that each named executives compensation is at
appropriate and competitive levels relative to each other and to
senior executives at our competitors; and
|
|
|
|
Permit, to the extent deemed appropriate by our Compensation
Committee, the bonuses paid to our named executives to be tax
deductible to us as qualified performance-based
compensation under Section 162(m) of the Internal
Revenue Code.
|
We have sought to design and implement compensation programs to
recognize and accommodate the significant changes that we have
undergone over the past three years during our transition from a
private company with a majority stockholder to a public company
with a diverse stockholder base. As a result, our compensation
programs do not incorporate rigid formulas but are designed to
take into account our performance during the previous fiscal
year.
Implementing
Our Objectives
We evaluate base salaries and short-term and long-term incentive
awards as tools to provide the appropriate incentives to meet
our compensation objectives both individually and in the
aggregate for our named executives. We believe the most
important indicator of whether our compensation objectives are
being met is whether we have motivated our named executives to
deliver superior performance, particularly with respect to
financial performance and stockholders returns, and incentivized
executives performing in line with our expectations to continue
their careers with us.
130
Elements
of Executive Compensation
Each compensation component is structured to recognize
individual performance and to incentivize both short and
long-term performance. Our compensation program consists of the
following short-term and long-term components:
Short-term
components
|
|
|
|
|
Base salary
|
|
|
|
Variable annual and quarterly performance-based cash bonus awards
|
|
|
|
One-time cash performance-based bonus awards for exceptional
individual performance
|
|
|
|
Benefits and perquisites
|
Long-term
component
|
|
|
|
|
Periodic grants of long-term equity-based awards including
restricted stock units and stock options
|
The foregoing elements combine to promote the compensation
objectives that we have outlined above. The Compensation
Committee believes that a mix of both short-term cash incentives
and long-term equity incentives are appropriate to implement our
overall compensation program. The Compensation Committee sets
base salaries and benefits and perquisites at levels that are
designed to provide a competitive level of compensation in order
achieve our objective of attracting, motivating and retaining
management talent of high quality. The Compensation Committee
structures performance-based cash bonus awards to provide our
named executives with compensation that rewards the achievement
of our quarterly and annual goals and other near term
stockholder value-creation strategies. The Compensation
Committee uses equity incentive awards to motivate named
executives to achieve superior performance over a longer period
of time and to tie the majority of each named executives
compensation to long-term stockholder value creation. In
determining the amount of the compensation awarded to a
particular named executive, the Compensation Committee considers
the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Whether the short and long-term components of the compensation
package, in absolute as well as relative terms, assure that
appropriate recognition, incentives, and retention value are
maintained.
|
|
|
|
Our share price performance during the fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
Our performance during the fiscal year as measured against
projections of our performance prepared by management for the
fiscal year, including projections in respect of revenue and net
income, as adjusted, per share.
|
|
|
|
Information prepared by our outside compensation consultant,
Compensia, as described under Competitive Data and
Role of Compensation Consultants below, including
information with respect to the compensation plan arrangements
of technology companies with revenues comparable to ours and
selected peer companies.
|
|
|
|
Subjective evaluations prepared by our Chief Executive Officer
with respect to the individual performance of each of our other
named executives, consistent with our compensation objectives.
Our Chief Executive Officer did not make recommendations about
his own compensation.
|
Based on the foregoing factors as well as the objectives
described above, the Compensation Committee considers the total
compensation that may be awarded to the named executive
including the allocation among base salary, performance based
bonuses, equity incentives and benefits and perquisites. The
Compensation Committees goal in awarding compensation is
to award compensation that is reasonable in relation to the
objectives of our compensation program when all elements of
potential compensation are considered.
Tax
Considerations
Section 162(m) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code
places a limit on the tax deduction for compensation in excess
of $1 million paid to certain covered employees
of a publicly held corporation (generally, the
corporations
131
principal executive officer and its next four most highly
compensated executive officers in the year that the compensation
is paid). This limitation applies only to compensation which is
not considered performance-based under the Section 162(m)
rules. The Compensation Committee believes that it is in our
best interests and the best interests of our stockholders to
comply with the limitations of Section 162(m) of the Code
to the extent practicable and consistent with retaining,
attracting, and motivating our named executives. No named
executive received annual compensation in fiscal year 2007 that
exceeded the $1,000,000 limit for purposes of
Section 162(m). Our Bonus Plan provides for performance
based awards within the meaning of Section 162(m) and the
Compensation Committee generally intends to grant awards under
the Bonus Plan that are performance based within the meaning of
Section 162(m).
Role
of CEO in Determining Executive Compensation For Named
Executives
As noted above, in connection with the determination of
compensation for executive officers, Mr. Bergeron provides
recommendations to the Compensation Committee; however,
Mr. Bergeron does not make a recommendation as to his own
compensation. While the Compensation Committee uses this
information and values Mr. Bergerons recommendations,
the Compensation Committee ultimately approves the compensation
program for named executives. Mr. Bergeron was not present
at any Compensation Committee discussions regarding his own
compensation.
Speculative
Transactions
In accordance with our insider trading policy, we do not permit
any employee, including the named executives, to enter into any
derivative or hedging transaction on our stock (including
short-sales, market options, equity swaps, etc.).
Employment
Agreements
We may enter into employment agreements with our named executive
officers, if we determine that an employment agreement is
necessary to obtain a measure of assurance as to the
executives continued employment in light of prevailing
market competition for the particular position held by the named
executive, or if the Compensation Committee determines that an
employment agreement is necessary and appropriate to attract,
motivate, and retain executive talent in light of market
conditions, the prior experience of the executive, or our
practices with respect to other similarly situated employees.
Based on an evaluation of these factors, we entered into an
amended and restated employment agreement with our Chief
Executive Officer, Mr. Bergeron during the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2007. The terms of this employment
agreement are described below under Employment Agreement
with our Chief Executive Officer.
Indemnification
Agreements
As permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law, we have
adopted provisions in our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation that authorize and require us to indemnify our
officers and directors to the full extent permitted under
Delaware law, subject to limited exceptions. We have also
entered, and intend to continue to enter, into separate
indemnification agreements with each of our directors and
officers which may be broader than the specific indemnification
provisions contained in Delaware law.
Employment
Agreement with our Chief Executive Officer
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, our Compensation
Committee undertook a review of the compensation program for
Mr. Bergeron, our Chief Executive Officer. The Compensation
Committee was mindful of the substantial equity that
Mr. Bergeron had acquired in 2002 in connection with our
investment and recapitalization led by Mr. Bergeron and
GTCR Golder Rauner and that the portion of the equity acquired
in 2002 that was subject to vesting conditions would become
fully vested by the end of the third quarter of fiscal year 2007.
Our Compensation Committee determined that renewal of
Mr. Bergerons 2002 employment agreement was
appropriate but also sought to establish a program that provided
for longer term incentives designed to reward Mr. Bergeron
for achieving operational and financial goals set by the
Compensation Committee. The program was
132
also designed to ensure that a significant portion of
Mr. Bergerons compensation would be directly
correlated to value creation for our stockholders, thus aligning
Mr. Bergerons interests more directly with those of
our stockholders.
In January 2007, we entered into an amended and restated
employment agreement with Mr. Bergeron that provides for an
annual base salary $700,000, subject to annual increases at the
discretion of the Compensation Committee. The agreement also
provides for a potential annual cash bonus, of between 0 and
200% of the target bonus established by the Compensation
Committee, with an initial target bonus for fiscal year 2007 of
$900,000. The cash bonus is to be based on
Mr. Bergerons performance and the achievement of
pre-established performance criteria established by the
Compensation Committee.
The term of the employment agreement ends on October 31,
2009, subject to automatic renewal for additional one-year
periods six months prior to the termination date. If
Mr. Bergerons employment is terminated without Cause
or if Mr. Bergeron terminates his employment for Good
Reason (as such terms are defined in the employment agreement),
then Mr. Bergeron may be entitled to severance equal to one
years current base salary and bonus paid for the prior
fiscal year provided that any severance payments are conditioned
on Mr. Bergerons compliance with the noncompetition
provisions of the employment agreement. We have the option to
extend the noncompetition period for an additional year, by
paying Mr. Bergeron an additional years severance.
The employment agreement also entitles Mr. Bergeron to earn
up to 900,000 performance restricted stock units
(RSUs) over a three year period based upon growth in
our net income, as adjusted, per share and our share price. The
RSUs will vest in three annual tranches of 200,000 RSUs each in
the event that we meet specified financial performance targets.
For fiscal year 2007, vesting of 200,000 RSUs required that we
report net income, as adjusted, per share of $1.60, which
exceeded managements guidance for fiscal year 2007 at the
date of the agreement. For fiscal years 2008 and 2009, vesting
of 200,000 RSUs will require 20% annual increases in net income,
as adjusted, per share. Net income, as adjusted, is to be
determined on a basis consistent with our reported net income,
as adjusted, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2006. In
addition, in each year, Mr. Bergeron may earn up to a
further 100,000 RSUs but only if we achieve both the targeted
improvement in net income, as adjusted, per share results
and our share price exceeds pre-established levels based on the
volume weighted average price of our common stock (as reported
on the New York Stock Exchange) in the 10 trading days beginning
with the second full trading day following our announcement of
financial results for the applicable fiscal year ($43.20 per
share for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, $51.84
per share for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, and
$62.20 per share for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2009). Each years RSU grant also has an additional service
requirement under which any RSUs earned will not vest until the
end of the fiscal year following the year for which the net
income per share, as adjusted, target is met. As a result, the
Compensation Committee believed that the RSUs provide
significant incentives to Mr. Bergeron to remain with us,
continue to grow our business, and increase stockholder value.
The performance target for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 was not met and therefore none of the RSUs
for that year will vest.
Separation
Agreement with the Companys Chief Financial
Officer
We entered into a separation agreement, with
Mr. Zwarenstein effective April 1, 2008, which,
subject to the terms and conditions thereof, provides for the
payment of a severance amount of $250,000, which represents
Mr. Zwarensteins right to severance under any and all
severance agreements and our severance policies, if any, offset
by $150,000 of quarterly bonus payments received by
Mr. Zwarenstein with respect to our fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007 which Mr. Zwarenstein has agreed to
reimburse to us because our restated results did not achieve
the quarterly bonus targets. Mr. Zwarenstein will also be
entitled to receive certain health insurance and similar welfare
benefits for 18 months from his resignation date.
Indemnification and confidentiality provisions to which
Mr. Zwarenstein is entitled or bound under pre-existing
employment arrangements remain in full force and effect. We and
Mr. Zwarenstein have agreed to cooperate with one another
to ensure an orderly transition and in respect of any ongoing
legal proceedings or related matters. Mr. Zwarenstein also
agreed to enter into mutual releases.
133
Determination
of Compensation
Role
of Compensation Consultants
We and the Compensation Committee consult from time to time with
executive compensation consultants and consider the compensation
levels of companies within our industry and other industries
that compete for the same talent. Neither we nor the
Compensation Committee has maintained any long-term contractual
relationship with any compensation consultant. Periodically, we
have also retained compensation consultants to assist in the
design of programs that affect named executive compensation. As
described below, in fiscal year 2007, the Compensation Committee
retained Compensia to provide assistance in reviewing our
compensation levels and the proposed structure of the
compensation program for our Chief Executive Officer and other
named executives.
Competitive
Data
For fiscal year 2007, as in prior years, Compensia provided
market data and an analysis of compensation paid to our named
executives. The data for this study came from two sources:
(1) pertinent data from annual reports and proxy statements
from the peer group companies; and (2) the surveys
described below. The peer group and survey companies reviewed
and approved by the Compensation Committee are primarily
technology companies, some of which compete with us for business
or for executive personnel. The Compensation Committees
intent was to choose peer group members or surveys featuring
companies that have one or more attributes significantly similar
to us, including size (evaluated on the basis of revenue),
location, general industry, or products. Compensia and
representatives of our Human Resources department and outside
counsel then reviewed this data with the Compensation Committee.
The following companies made up the peer group for which
Compensia provided data:
|
|
|
|
|
BISYS Group
|
|
Intermec
|
|
Retalix
|
Business Objects S.A.
|
|
Metrologic Instruments
|
|
salesforce.com
|
Cadence Design Systems
|
|
MICROS Systems
|
|
ScanSource
|
CheckFree
|
|
Novell
|
|
Sybase, Inc.
|
eFunds
|
|
Palm
|
|
Transaction Systems Architects
|
|
|
|
|
Zebra Technologies
|
Data from the following surveys were also used by Compensia to
provide additional compensation information to the Compensation
Committee:
|
|
|
|
|
Radford Compensation Survey: Technology
companies with reported annual revenues of between
$500 million and $1 billion; and
|
|
|
|
Compensia Survey: Selected technology
companies with reported annual revenues of between
$200 million and $1 billion.
|
The Compensation Committee used this data as one of numerous
factors in its decisions regarding compensation. Generally the
data is used as a reference point in making decisions as to
whether the contributions of each executive are properly
reflected in his compensation. The Compensation Committee also
gives great weight to business performance, including
performance under several financial metrics, and individual
performance as described below.
The Compensation Committee reviewed our executive compensation
programs and practices, and analyzed, for each named executive,
all existing elements of compensation (including base pay, cash
bonus awards, and long-term compensation in the form of equity
awards). The Compensation Committee compared these compensation
components separately, and in total, to compensation at the peer
group companies in an effort to set each element of compensation
at a level such that the aggregate total compensation for each
named executive officer is at or above the top quartile of peers
surveyed, due to performance and desire to retain and motivate
our most talented and experienced executives.
134
Base
Salary
The objective of base salary is to provide fixed compensation to
a named executive that reflects his or her job responsibilities,
experience, value to our company, and demonstrated performance.
The salary of our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Bergeron,
for the 2007 fiscal year was determined by his employment
agreement with us. The salaries for the other named executive
officers were determined by the Compensation Committee based on
a variety of factors including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
The scope and importance of the named executives
responsibilities.
|
|
|
|
The contribution and experience of the named executive.
|
|
|
|
Competitive market information regarding salaries, including the
report that the Compensation Committee received from Compensia.
|
|
|
|
The importance of retaining the named executive along with the
competitiveness of the market for the named executives
role and responsibilities.
|
|
|
|
The recommendation of our Chief Executive Officer based on his
subjective evaluation of the individuals performance.
|
Base salaries are typically reviewed annually in the first
quarter of each fiscal year in connection with annual
performance reviews and adjusted to take into account the
factors described above.
Fiscal
Year 2007 Base Salary Determination
The following table identifies actions taken during fiscal year
2007 with respect to salaries of the named executive officers:
|
|
|
Named Executive Officer
|
|
Action
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
$700,000 in accordance with the salary set forth in his
employment agreement
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
Increased from $320,000 to $400,000 effective November 1, 2006
|
Isaac Angel
|
|
$302,760 effective November 1, 2006. Mr. Angel joined our
company on November 1, 2006 following the acquisition of Lipman.
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
Increased from $300,000 to $315,000 effective November 1, 2006
|
William Atkinson
|
|
Increased from $300,000 to $400,000 effective November 1, 2006
|
The Compensation Committee decided to increase the salaries of
Messrs. Zwarenstein, Angel, Atkinson, and Waller primarily
based on the evaluation of such individuals performance by
our Chief Executive Officer. In the case of
Mr. Zwarenstein, the Compensation Committee noted his work
in building out our financial and accounting infrastructure. In
addition, the Compensation Committee considered the increased
job responsibilities that Mr. Zwarenstein undertook in our
business and corporate development. In particular, the
Compensation Committee noted that Mr. Zwarensteins
efforts were instrumental towards our successful completion of
the acquisition of Lipman in the prior fiscal year and that his
base salary should be adjusted accordingly. In the case of
Mr. Angel, who joined our company on November 1, 2006,
in connection with the acquisition of Lipman, the Compensation
Committee determined to set his salary primarily at a range that
was appropriate within our compensation structure based on the
Compensation Committees review of base salary compensation
of our other named executives, with appropriate adjustment to
ensure that Mr. Angel would remain motivated following the
Lipman acquisition. The Compensation Committee determined that
an increase to Mr. Atkinsons salary was appropriate
in light of our strong performance in international and emerging
markets. The Compensation Committee also noted that
Mr. Atkinsons responsibilities required extensive
international travel and that his base salary should be adjusted
to reflect these additional requirements on
Mr. Atkinsons time. Mr. Wallers
compensation was increased as a result of his efforts to
increase the growth in our petroleum products. The Compensation
Committee also considered the fact that Mr. Wallers
responsibilities were expanded to include our multilane products.
135
Performance-Based
Bonuses
We pay quarterly and annual bonuses as a component of overall
compensation as well as to provide an incentive and reward for
superior performance. Quarterly bonuses are generally paid in
cash in the following fiscal quarter based on the prior
periods performance as compared to pre-determined
performance goals and individual performance of the named
executives during the quarter and are intended to account for
approximately two-thirds of aggregate bonus compensation for our
named executives, with the exception of Mr. Bergeron, who
receives an annual bonus only. Annual bonuses are typically paid
in the first fiscal quarter of each year based on our financial
performance during the prior fiscal year and individual
performance of the named executives. From time to time, we may
also pay additional special one-time bonuses for exceptional
performance or for the achievement of specific accomplishments
that the Compensation Committee, after consultation with
management, has determined are of significant importance to us.
In setting annual bonus compensation, which is usually intended
to account for all of the bonus compensation of our CEO and at
least one-third of overall bonus compensation of our other named
executives, the Compensation Committee determines a target
dollar value for annual bonus awards at the beginning of the
fiscal year and has the discretion to deliver between 0% and
200% of the target annual bonus compensation for our CEO and
between 0% and 100% of the target annual bonus compensation to
our other named executives based on the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
Our actual financial performance in comparison to internal
financial performance forecasts prepared by our management and
presented to the Compensation Committee and the Board of
Directors in the first quarter of each fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
Our stock price performance as compared to internal stock price
appreciation targets and the stock price appreciation of our
peers during the prior fiscal year. For purposes of this
evaluation, our peers are those companies listed under
Competitive Data above.
|
|
|
|
Performance considerations relating to increased
responsibilities performed by an executive during the fiscal
year which were not contemplated when the executives
target bonus was established.
|
|
|
|
Performance considerations relating to unforeseen events during
the prior year.
|
|
|
|
The Compensations Committees subjective evaluation
of the named executives individual performance.
|
These factors are described in further detail below:
In the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Compensation
Committee and the Board of Directors receives financial
forecasts from management. Based on its review of the financial
forecasts and its assessment of the probability of achieving
these forecasts, after consultation with management and the full
Board, the Compensation Committee sets three financial
performance metrics for the named executives. These metrics
serve as the primary
136
basis for the Compensation Committees evaluation of our
financial performance. These financial performance metrics are
set forth below:
|
|
|
Financial Performance Metric
|
|
Description
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Revenue growth is an essential component of long-term success
and viability. Revenue is calculated in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
|
Net Income, as Adjusted, Per Share
|
|
Net income, as adjusted, growth provides an indicator as to our
ability to generate returns on its operations and fund future
growth. This is a non-GAAP financial measure that we report in
our annual and quarterly financial releases. Management has
historically used this non-GAAP financial metric because it
believes that it helps them evaluate our performance and compare
our current results with those for prior periods as well as with
the results of other companies in its industry.
|
EBITDA, as Adjusted
|
|
EBITDA, as adjusted, or earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, and amortization, provides a good indicator of our
financial performance by reference to cash generated by our
business. EBITDA, as adjusted, is a non-GAAP measure that we use
internally to evaluate the overall operating performance of our
business.
|
The Compensation Committee views financial performance, along
with stock price performance, as the two most important factors
in determining a named executives annual bonus.
|
|
2.
|
Stock
Price Performance
|
In accordance with the compensation program goal of tying
executive compensation to stock price performance, the
Compensation Committee places significant weight on the stock
price performance of our common stock in setting annual bonus
awards. The stock price performance factor is divided into two
elements. The first element consists of an absolute performance
goal for target stock price appreciation from the date that we
announce results for the prior fiscal year through the date that
we announce results for the current fiscal year, or the
stock price performance period. The second element
consists of a relative performance goal that compares our stock
price appreciation during the stock price performance period to
our peers that are identified under Competitive Data
above.
After the end of the fiscal year, the Compensation Committee
reviews our actual performance against each of the financial and
stock price performance metrics. In determining the extent to
which the financial and stock price performance metrics are met
for a given period, the Compensation Committee exercises its
judgment whether to reflect or exclude the impact of changes in
accounting principles and extraordinary, unusual, or
infrequently occurring events. To the extent appropriate, the
Compensation Committee will also consider the nature and impact
of such events in the context of the bonus determination.
Although, the Compensation Committee believes that the bulk of
the bonus should normally be based on objective measures of
financial and stock performance, the Compensation Committee
believes that in certain circumstances more subjective elements
are also important in setting the bonus compensation of named
executives.
|
|
4.
|
Individual
Performance
|
The Compensation Committee recognizes that it is important to
reward individual contributions. The Compensation Committee
strives to reward individual performance by determining whether
pre-established individual goals have been met and by
determining the subjective performance of each named executive
during the fiscal year.
In the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Compensation
Committee sets a list of individual performance goals for our
Chief Executive Officer after meeting with him. At this meeting,
the Compensation Committee also reviews
137
the individual performance goals that the Chief Executive
Officer has set for the other named executives and makes
adjustments to those performance goals as it deems appropriate.
After the completion of the fiscal year, the Compensation
Committee has a meeting with the Chief Executive Officer to
review whether the Chief Executive Officers
pre-established individual goals were met and to provide the
Chief Executive Officer with an opportunity to present what he
believes are his significant contributions to our company for
the fiscal year. The Compensation Committee also reviews the
individual performance of each other named executive officer
with the Chief Executive Officer. In determining the overall
individual performance of each named executive officer other
than the Chief Executive Officer, the Compensation Committee
places substantial weight on the Chief Executive Officers
recommendations.
|
|
5.
|
Compensation
Committee Discretion
|
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Compensation Committee has
the discretion, in appropriate circumstances, to award a bonus
less than the amount determined by the steps set out above,
including to award no bonus at all. The Compensation Committee
exercised this discretion in 2007 and determined not to award
any annual bonuses to any of the named executives.
Fiscal
Year 2007 Bonus Determinations
Determination
of 2007 Annual Target Bonus Amount
In the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Compensation
Committee sets a target bonus amount for each named executive
officer. The target bonus takes into account all factors that
the Compensation Committee deems relevant, with a focus on the
objectives of our compensation program. In particular, the
Compensation Committee evaluates individual and company
performance during the last fiscal year and then existing
competitive market conditions for executive talent in
determining the target bonus of the executive officer in the
current fiscal year. The Compensation Committee also places
significant weight on the recommendation of our Chief Executive
Officer in setting target annual bonus compensation of the other
named executives for the fiscal year. For the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2007, the Chief Executive Officers target
bonus was $900,000 in accordance with the terms of his
employment agreement with us.
Annual
Target Bonus
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, the Compensation
Committee approved the following target bonuses for the named
executives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Target
|
|
Named Executive
|
|
Annual Bonus
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
$
|
900,000
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
$
|
100,000
|
|
Isaac Angel(1)
|
|
$
|
108,237
|
|
William Atkinson
|
|
$
|
100,000
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Angels bonuses have been converted from Israeli
Shekels to U.S. Dollars at the rate of 3.963 to 1. |
As indicated above, Mr. Bergeron may receive between 0% and
200% of his annual target bonus and each other named executive
may receive between 0% and 100% of his annual target bonus based
on the Compensation Committees review of the factors
listed above, with the goal of allocating at least 80% of a
named executives annual bonus based on objective
performance-based factors. Accordingly, each named executive may
receive a bonus that is greater or less than his annual target
bonus (and which could be zero), depending on whether, and to
what extent performance and other conditions are satisfied and
the Compensation Committees evaluation of the named
executives performance.
138
Annual
Bonus Awards
On December 3, 2007, following a review by and on the
recommendation of management, we announced that our unaudited
interim consolidated financial statements for the three months
ended January 31, 2007, the three and six months ended
April 30, 2007 and the three and nine months ended
July 31, 2007 should no longer be relied upon, principally
due to errors in accounting related to the valuation of
in-transit inventory and allocation of manufacturing and
distribution overhead to inventory, each of which affects our
reported costs of net revenues. We also concluded that we would
need to restate these financial statements in order to correct
errors that overstated previously reported inventories by
material amounts as of January 31, 2007, April 30,
2007 and July 31, 2007, and understated cost of net
revenues by material amounts for the three month periods ended
January 31, 2007, April 30, 2007, and July 31,
2007. Following the announcement of the anticipated
restatements, our stock price lost a significant amount of its
value. In addition, our financial performance measured in terms
of net income, as adjusted, per share, was lower than what we
had previously reported. In light of the restatements, the
Compensation Committee determined that it would not be
appropriate to award any annual bonus compensation to the
currently employed named executives. Mr. Atkinson, who was
not employed by us on the date that we announced the
restatements, received a $50,000 pro-rated annual bonus, which
was the amount negotiated and established in connection with the
termination of his employment with us.
Determination
of 2007 Quarterly Target Bonus Amounts
In the first quarter of each fiscal year, the Compensation
Committee sets quarterly bonus targets for each of our named
executive officers other than our CEO. Approximately 80% of the
quarterly bonus targets will generally be awarded if
performance-based goals established by the Compensation
Committee for the quarter are met. Mr. Zwarensteins
performance-based goals consisted of quantitative financial
goals of the company for each quarter. Mr. Atkinsons
and Mr. Wallers performance-based goals were based on
(A) the amount contributed by their respective business
unit to our operating income for the quarter and (B) the
gross margin achieved by their respective business unit for the
quarter. If Mr. Atkinson or Mr. Wallers business
units contributed between 85% and 100% of their respective
performance-based goal, they were entitled to receive a reduced
portion of their performance-based quarterly bonuses.
Mr. Atkinson and Mr. Wallers performance-based
bonus could also exceed 100% of the target performance-based
quarterly bonus if their business units contributed in excess of
100% of their respective performance-based goal.
Mr. Angels performance-based goals were based on a
combination of engineering project schedule goals and supply
chain goals including (but not limited to) product availability,
cost of goods sold results, cost reduction initiatives,
inventory levels and quality levels. Approximately 20% of the
quarterly bonus target will be awarded if the named executive
has met or exceeded the expectations of our CEO based on our
CEOs subjective review of the named executives
individual performance during the quarter. The Compensation
Committee approved the following target bonuses for the named
executives in 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
Named Executive
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Target Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Target Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Target Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Target Bonus
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
Isaac Angel(1)
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
William Atkinson
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Angels bonuses have been converted from Israeli
Shekels to U.S. Dollars at the rate of 3.963 to 1. |
139
Quarterly
Bonus Awards
The following quarterly bonus awards were actually made to our
named executives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
Performance
|
|
|
Individual
|
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Target
|
|
Named Executive
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein(1)
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
Isaac Angel(2)
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
54,946
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
27,473
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
William Atkinson(3)
|
|
$
|
40,490
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
34,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
Elmore Waller(4)
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
12,500
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,500
|
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
|
$
|
25,613
|
|
|
$
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Zwarenstein agreed to refund his quarterly bonus
payments pursuant to his separation agreement with us. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Angels bonuses have been converted from Israeli
Shekels to U.S. Dollars at the rate of 3.963 to 1. |
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Atkinson did not receive any quarterly bonus
compensation in the third or fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007
because of the termination of his employment with us. |
As part of his separation agreement with us, Mr. Atkinson
was paid a discretionary bonus of $50,000 for the third quarter
of fiscal year 2007. This amount was equal to
Mr. Atkinsons total target performance and individual
bonus for the third quarter. Mr. Atkinson did not receive
any quarterly bonus compensation in the fourth quarter of fiscal
year 2007 because of the termination of his employment with us.
|
|
|
(4) |
|
In lieu of receiving his quarterly individual bonus in the
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007, Mr. Waller received the
special one-time bonus described below. |
One-Time
Bonuses
Due to the many positive contributions by Mr. Waller to our
financial performance in 2007, the fact that
Mr. Wallers target bonuses were lower than the other
named executives and the fact that we generally did not award
bonuses to the named executives in 2007 because of the
restatement of our financial statements, Mr. Waller was
awarded a special one-time bonus of $35,000 in the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2007.
Long-Term
Equity Incentive Compensation
At the mid-point of each fiscal year, the Compensation Committee
determines whether to make long-term incentive awards to each
named executive, with the exception of our Chief Executive
Officer, whose long-term incentive awards are determined solely
on the basis of the objective performance-based criteria set
forth in his employment agreement and which are described under
Employment Agreement with our Chief Executive
Officer above.
Amount of Incentive Compensation. The amount
of long-term incentive compensation, if any, awarded each year
to the other named executive officers is determined by the
Compensation Committee, in consultation with our Chief Executive
Officer, after taking into account our overall compensation
program objectives. These grants are intended to serve as
incentives for our named executives to remain with us and
continue that performance and to tie a substantial amount of
their overall compensation to the long-term performance of our
common stock. In making awards of options and restricted stock
units during fiscal year 2007, the Compensation Committee
determined that at least one-third of total compensation for
each of the named executives other than Mr. Bergeron should
be in the form of these awards to ensure that the interests of
each of our named executives is aligned with the interests of
our stockholders. The Compensation Committee has determined that
the value of restricted stock units for purposes of the
long-term incentive compensation determination should be based
on the value of the underlying common stock on the date of
grant. We have determined that the value of stock options for
purposes of the long-term incentive compensation determination
should be based on the Black-Scholes value of the stock option
on the date of grant.
Mix of Awards. We view stock options as a way
to link the compensation of our named executives directly to
value creation for our stockholders, because the amount that a
named executive realizes from stock options depends solely on
the increase in value of our common stock from the grant date of
the option. We view restricted stock units, which are an
unsecured promise to deliver shares of our common stock, as a
method to economically place each
140
recipient of a restricted stock unit in the same position as a
stockholder because the amount that a recipient ultimately
receives from a restricted stock unit depends on the actual
value of shares of common stock when the shares underlying the
restricted stock units are delivered.
The Compensation Committee has determined that a mix of stock
options and restricted stock units should normally be granted to
our named executives to provide an appropriate allocation of
performance and retention incentives that take into account the
greater risks associated with options as compared to restricted
stock units. The Compensation Committee weighted long-term
incentives more towards restricted stock units because this
award reflects both increases and decreases in stock price from
the grant date market price as a way of tying compensation more
closely to changes in stockholder value at all levels. In
addition, weighting toward restricted stock units allows the
Compensation Committee to deliver equivalent value with less use
of authorized shares.
Vesting of Long-Term Incentives. Generally
stock options granted to executives become exercisable as to 25%
of the grant approximately one year after the grant date and as
to the remainder of the grant in equal quarterly installments
over the following three years. The stock option life is seven
years from the date of grant and offers executives the right to
purchase the stated number of shares of our common stock at an
exercise price per share determined on the date of grant. Stock
options have value only to the extent the price of our shares on
the date of exercise exceeds the applicable exercise price.
Restricted stock units also generally vest as to 25% of the
grant approximately one year after the grant date and as to the
remainder in equal quarterly installments over the following
three years and upon vesting, shares of our common stock are
delivered on a one-for-one basis.
Accounting Considerations. All equity grants
are accounted for in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment. It should be noted that the
Compensation Committee did not attribute significant weight to
the accounting charges associated with grants of options and
restricted stock units granted to our named executives in light
of the fact that these items do not directly relate to the
performance of our named executives.
Equity Grant Procedures. Equity awards to our
employees are awarded only on dates that the Compensation
Committee meets. As a result of this procedure, we have
historically awarded equity grants to our named executives
(other than our Chief Executive Officer) at the Compensation
Committees regularly scheduled meeting in March of each
year. However, in 2008, the Compensation Committee does not
expect to schedule this meeting until after we have completed
the restatement of our financial statements and filed our
Form 10-K
for 2007 and
Form 10-Qs
for the first and second quarters of 2008.
Fiscal
Year 2007 Long-Term Incentive Determinations
Because none of the performance criteria set forth in
Mr. Bergerons employment agreement were met for
fiscal year 2007, the 300,000 RSUs that could have vested under
Mr. Bergerons employment agreement as a result of
fiscal year 2007 performance were cancelled in the first quarter
of fiscal 2008.
In November 2006, we awarded Isaac Angel a grant of 150,000
options. This grant was made in order to retain Mr. Angel
following our acquisition of Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd.
In particular, the Compensation Committee determined that it
would be appropriate to award a significant equity award to
Mr. Angel because of the fact that he held relatively few
unvested equity awards upon the commencement of his employment
with us.
In January 2007, we awarded Elmore Waller a grant of 25,000
options. This was a special one-time grant that was awarded to
Mr. Waller in order to reward Mr. Waller for his
individual performance in connection with the Lipman acquisition.
In July 2007, we awarded an annual refresher grant of 35,000
options to each of the named executives other than
Mr. Bergeron. This amount was lower than in prior years due
to the significant appreciation in our common stock and the
higher Black-Scholes value of each option on a per option basis.
The Compensation Committee also considered the amount of equity
currently held by each of the named executives other than
Mr. Bergeron and the fact that each named executives
existing equity awards, together with the refresher grant, were
sufficient to motivate these named executive to perform in a
manner that would provide value creation for our shareholders.
141
Perquisites
and Benefits
Other than with respect to Isaac Angel, we do not provide
perquisites or personal benefits (such as financial services,
air travel (other than reimbursement for business travel),
country club memberships or car allowances) to the named
executives other than standard health benefits available to all
employees. We provided Mr. Angel with the use of a car and
a recuperation allowance benefit as is customary for executive
employees of Israel, Mr. Angels home country. We also
reimbursed Mr. Angel for the cost of his home telephone
use. These benefits were previously provided to Mr. Angel
in connection with his employment at Lipman, which we acquired
on November 1, 2006.
Mix of
Compensation Elements
As discussed above, we weigh compensation for the named
executives primarily towards short-term performance-based
compensation and long-term equity compensation. However, we do
not have any pre-established targets relating to the mix between
base salary, short-term performance-based compensation and
long-term equity compensation. The Compensation Committee makes
a determination as to the particular mix of a named
executives total compensation for a particular year based
on its review of the factors described above relating to how
base salaries, short-term performance-based compensation and
long-term equity compensation are set in each year.
Executive
Compensation
The following table sets forth compensation awarded to, paid to,
or earned by VeriFones chief executive officer, chief
financial officer, and the three other mostly highly compensated
executive officers during fiscal year 2007. These executives are
referred to in this report as the named executive
officers.
Summary
Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
Nonqualified
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
Deferred Comp
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
Salary
|
|
Bonus
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Earnings
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Year
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
695,833
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,499
|
(3)
|
|
|
564, 631
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,968
|
(4)
|
|
|
1,594,931
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
396,667
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
(5)
|
|
|
346,744
|
|
|
|
463,779
|
|
|
|
120,000
|
(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,864
|
(6)
|
|
|
1,362,054
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isaac Angel
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
321,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,503,039
|
|
|
|
192,284
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102,173
|
(8)
|
|
|
4,119,396
|
|
Executive Vice President, Global Operations(7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
348,120
|
|
|
|
70,000
|
(10)
|
|
|
834,899
|
|
|
|
1,740,447
|
|
|
|
74,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,971
|
(11)
|
|
|
3,077,927
|
|
Executive Vice President, Global Marketing and Business
Development(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
314,375
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
71,875
|
|
|
|
336,705
|
|
|
|
70,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,907
|
(12)
|
|
|
845,475
|
|
Executive Vice President, Integrated Systems
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts shown in this column reflect our accounting expense for
these restricted stock unit awards and do not reflect whether
the recipient has actually realized a financial benefit from the
awards (such as by vesting in a restricted stock unit award).
This column represents the dollar amount recognized for
financial statement reporting purposes with respect to fiscal
year 2007 for the fair value of restricted stock units granted
to the named executive officers in accordance with SFAS No.
123(R). Pursuant to SEC rules, the amounts shown exclude the
impact of estimated forfeitures related to service-based vesting
conditions. No stock awards were forfeited by any of the named
executive officers during fiscal year 2007. For additional
information, including information on the valuation assumptions
with respect to grants made prior to fiscal year 2007, refer to |
142
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7 Stockholders Equity of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included herein.
See the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table for information on
awards made in fiscal year 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts shown in this column reflect our accounting expense for
these awards and do not reflect whether the recipient has
actually realized a financial benefit from the awards (such as
by exercising stock options). This column represents the dollar
amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes
with respect to fiscal year 2007 for the fair value of stock
options granted to the named executive officers. The fair value
was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model in
accordance with SFAS No. 123(R). Pursuant to SEC
rules, amounts shown exclude the impact of estimated forfeitures
related to service-based vesting conditions. For additional
information, including information on the valuation assumptions
with respect to grants made prior to fiscal year 2007, refer to
Note 7 Stockholders Equity of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included herein.
See the Grants of Plan-Based Awards table for information on
awards made in fiscal year 2007. |
|
(3) |
|
On January 4, 2007, we granted a total of 900,000 RSUs to
Mr. Bergeron. All these RSUs have performance and/or market
based vesting. As of October 31, 2007, we had not
recognized any compensation expense related to these RSUs as the
fiscal year 2007 financial targets were not achieved. The
200,000 performance units and the 100,000 market units related
to fiscal year 2007 were cancelled effective October 31,
2007. The financial targets for the fiscal years 2008 and 2009
tranches have not yet been determined; therefore, no measurement
date has occurred for those tranches. We will value the fiscal
year 2008 and 2009 tranches when all factors for measurement
have been determined and the measurement date has occurred. |
|
(4) |
|
Includes $39,104 relating to the difference between the fair
value at the time of the grant of restricted stock and the
purchase price for restricted stock granted under our 2002
Securities Purchase Plan. The amount represents the pro rata
amount of such discount for the restricted stock vesting during
the fiscal year. Also includes $7,000 of company 401(k)
plan matching contribution and $864 of life insurance premiums. |
|
(5) |
|
Comprised of the quarterly bonus awards paid to
Mr. Zwarenstein during fiscal year 2007. Pursuant to a
separation agreement between Mr. Zwarenstein and us,
Mr. Zwarenstein will reimburse to us the quarterly bonuses
totaling $150,000 paid in fiscal year 2007 because our restated
results did not achieve the quarterly bonus targets. |
|
(6) |
|
Comprised of $4,000 of company 401(k) plan matching contribution
and $864 of life insurance premium. |
|
(7) |
|
Effective January 1, 2008, Mr. Angel retired from his
role as Executive Vice President, Global Operations, and became
an advisor to us. In connection with his employment as an
advisor, Mr. Angel will receive the statutory minimum
employment wage in Israel. |
|
(8) |
|
Comprised of customary Israeli benefits, including $42,909 for
social benefits, $34,898 for car allowance, including the tax
gross-up,
$8,048 for disability insurance, and $16,318 for education,
social security payments, home phone lines, recuperation pay,
and medical costs. |
|
(9) |
|
Mr. Atkinson was terminated as of July 17, 2007. |
|
(10) |
|
$50,000 of Mr. Atkinsons bonus was a discretionary
bonus awarded to Mr. Atkinson in connection with the
termination of his employment with us. |
|
(11) |
|
Includes $2,607 relating to the difference between the fair
value at the time of the grant of restricted stock and the
purchase price for restricted stock granted under our 2002
Securities Purchase Plan. The amount represents the pro rata
amount of such discount for the restricted stock vesting during
the fiscal year. Also includes $6,500 of company 401(k)
plan matching contribution and $864 of life insurance premium. |
|
(12) |
|
Includes $1,043 relating to the difference between the fair
value at the time of the grant of restricted stock and the
purchase price for restricted stock granted under our 2002
Securities Purchase Plan. The amount represents the pro rata
amount of such discount for the restricted stock vesting during
the fiscal year. Also includes $864 of life insurance premium. |
143
Grants of
Plan-Based Awards
The following table sets forth certain information with respect
to grants of plan-based awards in fiscal year 2007 to our named
executive officers, including cash awards and equity awards. The
option and restricted stock unit awards granted to our named
executive officers in fiscal year 2007 were granted under our
2006 Equity Incentive Plan. For each grant of awards, one
quarter of the award vests after one year, and the remainder
vests ratably by quarter over the succeeding three years. Each
option award has a term of seven years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
or Base
|
|
Fair Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts Under
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of
|
|
Securities
|
|
Price of
|
|
Stock and
|
|
|
|
|
Board
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan
Awards
|
|
Stock or
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Option
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
Approval
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Units
|
|
Options
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
Date
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
(#)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
|
1/4/2007
|
|
|
|
1/4/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
300,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,150,000
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
|
|
|
6/26/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
321,920
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isaac Angel
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
|
|
|
6/26/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
321,920
|
|
Executive Vice President, Global
|
|
|
11/1/2006
|
|
|
|
9/12/2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
30.00
|
|
|
|
1,346,760
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
|
|
|
6/26/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
321,920
|
|
Executive Vice President, Global Marketing and Business
Development(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
|
|
|
6/26/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
321,920
|
|
Executive Vice President, Integrated
|
|
|
1/3/2007
|
|
|
|
12/13/2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
35.45
|
|
|
|
266,560
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Reflects threshold, target and maximum number of performance
share awards related to fiscal year 2007 financial targets,
granted under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, as described in
Compensation Discussion and Analysis. No
compensation expense was recognized related to these units in
fiscal year 2007 because the fiscal year 2007 financial targets
were not achieved. In the first quarter of 2008, the 200,000
performance units and the 100,000 market units related to fiscal
year 2007 financial targets were cancelled. |
|
(2) |
|
Reflects the grant date fair value of each target equity award
computed in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R). The
assumptions used in the valuation of these awards are set forth
in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included
herein. These amounts do not correspond to the actual value that
will be recognized by the named executive officers. |
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Atkinsons employment terminated as of
July 17, 2007, at which time his fiscal year 2007 option
grant was cancelled. |
144
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal 2007 Year-End
The following table provides information about unexercised
options held by each named executive officer as of
October 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
Market or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market
|
|
Unearned
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value of
|
|
Shares,
|
|
Shares,
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Shares or
|
|
Units or
|
|
Units or
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
Securities
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares or
|
|
Units of
|
|
Other
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Option/
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Underlying
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
Units of
|
|
Stock That
|
|
Rights
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Award
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
Option
|
|
Option
|
|
Stock That
|
|
Have not
|
|
That Have
|
|
That Have
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
Options (#)
|
|
Options (#)
|
|
Unearned
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Have not
|
|
Vested
|
|
not Vested
|
|
not Vested
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
Options (#)
|
|
Price ($)
|
|
Date
|
|
Vested (#)
|
|
($)(15)
|
|
(#)
|
|
($)(15)
|
|
Douglas G.Bergeron
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(1)
|
|
|
84,375
|
|
|
|
140,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.80
|
|
|
|
3/22/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
1,235,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer
|
|
|
1/4/2006
|
(14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
29,658,000
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
7/2/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(1)
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.86
|
|
|
|
3/22/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President and
|
|
|
4/29/2005
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,688
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
|
4/29/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial
|
|
|
8/9/2004
|
(4)
|
|
|
65,570
|
|
|
|
113,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.28
|
|
|
|
8/9/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,250
|
|
|
|
308,938
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9/12/2006
|
(16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
1,482,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isaac Angel
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
7/2/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice
|
|
|
11/1/2006
|
(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30.00
|
|
|
|
11/1/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President, Global
|
|
|
4/10/2006
|
(7)
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.52
|
|
|
|
4/10/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
10/21/2003
|
(6)
|
|
|
105,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.30
|
|
|
|
10/21/2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(8)
|
|
|
27,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.86
|
|
|
|
11/30/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice
|
|
|
4/29/2005
|
(8)
|
|
|
78,624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
|
11/30/2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President, Global
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,750
|
|
|
|
185,363
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing and
|
|
|
9/12/2006
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
494,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
7/2/2007
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.47
|
|
|
|
7/2/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Vice
|
|
|
1/3/2007
|
(10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.45
|
|
|
|
1/3/2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President,
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(1)
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.86
|
|
|
|
3/22/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated
|
|
|
1/7/2005
|
(11)
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
|
62,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
|
1/7/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
12/9/2003
|
(12)
|
|
|
4,715
|
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.05
|
|
|
|
12/9/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3/22/2006
|
(13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,250
|
|
|
|
308,938
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/4 of the shares on March 22, 2007 and 1/16 of shares each
quarter thereafter. |
|
(2) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/4 of the shares on July 2, 2008 and 1/16 of shares each
quarter thereafter. |
|
(3) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/4 of the shares on May 1, 2007 and 1/16 of shares each
quarter thereafter. |
|
(4) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/5 of the shares on July 1, 2005 and 1/20 of shares each
quarter thereafter. |
|
(5) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/4 of the shares on November 1, 2007 and 1/16 of shares
each quarter thereafter. |
|
(6) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/2 of the shares on October 21, 2005, 1/4 of the shares on
October 21, 2006, and 1/4 of the shares on October 21,
2007. |
|
(7) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/2 of the shares on April 10, 2008, 1/4 of the shares on
April 10, 2009, and 1/4 of the shares on April 10,
2010. |
|
(8) |
|
Per Mr. Atkinsons separation agreement, on
October 31, 2009, and for a period of thirty calendar days
thereafter, if Mr. Atkinson has complied with all of the
terms of his agreement, Mr. Atkinson will be entitled to
exercise his 2005 grant that was fully vested as of
October 31, 2007. |
145
|
|
|
(9) |
|
Per Mr. Atkinsons separation agreement, provided that
Mr. Atkinson has complied with all of the terms of his
agreement, the number of shares of common stock underlying
restricted stock units that were vested as of October 31,
2007, will be released on October 31, 2009. |
|
(10) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/4 of the shares on January 3, 2008 and 1/16 of shares
each quarter thereafter. |
|
(11) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/5 of the shares on December 1, 2006 and 1/20 of shares
each quarter thereafter. |
|
(12) |
|
Shares subject to this option vest and become exercisable as to
1/5 of the shares on January 1, 2005 and 1/20 of shares
each quarter thereafter. |
|
(13) |
|
Shares subject to this RSU vest and become exercisable as to 1/4
of the shares on March 22, 2007 and 1/16 of shares each
quarter thereafter. |
|
(14) |
|
On January 4, 2007, we granted a total of 900,000 RSUs to
Mr. Bergeron. All these RSUs have performance based and/or
market based vesting. As of October 31, 2007, 200,000
performance based units and 100,000 market units were cancelled
as the fiscal year 2007 financial targets related to these RSUs
were not achieved. The financial targets for the fiscal 2008 and
2009 RSU tranches have not yet been determined. |
|
(15) |
|
Market value of units of stock that have not vested is computed
by multiplying (1) $49.43, the closing price on
October 31, 2007, by (ii) the number of units of stock. |
|
(16) |
|
Shares subject to this RSU vest and become exercisable as to 1/4
of these shares on September 12, 2007 and 1/16 of shares
each quarter thereafter. |
Fiscal
Year 2007 Option Exercises and Stock Vested
The following table presents information concerning the
aggregate number of shares for which options were exercised
during fiscal year 2007 for each of the named executive
officers. In addition, the table presents information on shares
that were acquired upon vesting of stock awards during 2007 for
any of the named executive officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Realized
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
Acquired on
|
|
|
on Exercise
|
|
|
Acquired on
|
|
|
Realized on
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
|
Vesting
|
|
|
Vesting ($)(2)
|
|
|
Douglas G. Bergeron
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
563,500
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
171,992
|
|
|
|
5,616,805
|
|
|
|
13,750
|
|
|
|
539,375
|
|
Isaac Angel
Executive Vice President, Global Operations
|
|
|
135,000
|
|
|
|
3,915,269
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson
Executive Vice President, Global Marketing and Business
Development(3)
|
|
|
56,000
|
|
|
|
1,681,591
|
|
|
|
3,125
|
|
|
|
116,725
|
|
Elmore Waller
Executive Vice President Integrated Systems
|
|
|
72,785
|
|
|
|
2,152,315
|
|
|
|
3,750
|
|
|
|
140,875
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The value realized on the exercise is calculated as the
difference between the fair market value of the shares on the
date of exercise and the applicable exercise price for those
options. |
|
(2) |
|
The value realized on the shares acquired is the fair market
value of the shares on the date of vesting. |
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Atkinsons employment terminated as of
July 17, 2007. |
146
Potential
Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control
Our change of control arrangements with Mr. Bergeron and
Mr. Zwarenstein are included in their agreements with us.
Our equity plans also provide for change of control benefits for
all of our named executive officers. In addition, Mr. Angel
is entitled to certain statutory severance payments in
accordance with Israeli law. The tables below outline the
potential payments and benefits payable to each named executive
officer in the event of involuntary termination, or change of
control, as if such event had occurred as of October 31,
2007. None of our named executives are entitled to a severance
payment unless the change of control event is followed by an
involuntary or constructive termination. All such payments and
benefits would be provided by us.
Involuntary
or Constructive Involuntary Termination
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
Cash-Based
|
|
Continuation of
|
|
Intrinsic Value of
|
|
Intrinsic Value of
|
Name
|
|
Continuation
|
|
Incentive Award
|
|
Benefits
|
|
Unvested RSUs
|
|
Unvested Options
|
|
Douglas Bergeron
|
|
$
|
700,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,500,000
|
(3)
|
|
$
|
33,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
$
|
400,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Isaac Angel(1)
|
|
$
|
766,852
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Involuntary
or Constructive Involuntary Termination Following a Change of
Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
Cash-Based
|
|
Continuation of
|
|
Intrinsic Value of
|
|
Intrinsic Value of
|
Name
|
|
Continuation
|
|
Incentive Award
|
|
Benefits
|
|
Unvested RSUs
|
|
Unvested Options
|
|
Douglas Bergeron
|
|
$
|
700,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,500,000
|
(3)
|
|
$
|
33,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
$
|
400,000
|
|
|
$
|
300,000
|
|
|
$
|
20,091
|
|
|
$
|
1,791,838
|
(4)
|
|
$
|
6,766,663
|
(5)
|
Isaac Angel(1)
|
|
$
|
766,852
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Atkinson(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Elmore Waller
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
308,938
|
(6)
|
|
$
|
1,002,850
|
(7)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Based on Israeli labor laws, an Israeli employee, such as
Mr. Angel, is entitled to severance pay upon termination of
employment by the employer for any reason, including retirement,
based on the most recent monthly base salary of such employee
multiplied by the number years of employment of such employee.
Mr. Angel was entitled to severance of NIS 3,039,035 as of
October 31, 2007, or $766,852 based on a NIS to U.S. Dollar
exchange rate of 3.963 to 1 as of October 31, 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Atkinsons employment terminated prior to
October 31, 2007. As a result, Mr. Atkinson was not
entitled to receive any severance compensation as of that date. |
|
(3) |
|
Based on Mr. Bergerons bonus payment of $1,500,000 in
2006. This amount will be reduced to $0 on November 1, 2007
because Mr. Bergeron did not receive a bonus for 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
Calculated by taking the product of the trading price of our
common stock on October 31, 2007, of $49.43, and 36,250
RSUs subject to acceleration. |
|
(5) |
|
Calculated by taking the product of the difference between the
trading price of our common stock on October 31, 2007, of
$49.43, and the respective exercise prices of 198,750 unvested
options (113,750 of which have an exercise price of $3.28,
50,000 of which have an exercise price of $28.86 and 35,000 of
which have an exercise price of $35.47) subject to acceleration. |
|
(6) |
|
Calculated by taking the product of the trading price of our
common stock on October 31, 2007, of $49.43, and 6,250 RSUs
subject to acceleration. |
|
(7) |
|
Calculated by taking the product of the difference between the
trading price of our common stock on October 31, 2007, of
$49.43, and the respective exercise prices of 60,000 unvested
options (25,000 of which have an exercise price of $28.86 and
35,000 of which have an exercise price of $35.47) subject to
acceleration. |
147
Director
Compensation
For fiscal year 2007, all directors who are not our employees
were entitled to receive annual fees for service on the Board
and Board committees as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Annual director retainer
|
|
$
|
35,000
|
|
Annual committee chair retainers:
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Committee
|
|
$
|
20,000
|
|
Compensation Committee
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
Annual committee member retainers:
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Committee
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
Compensation Committee
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
|
|
$
|
5,000
|
|
All annual fees are paid in quarterly installments. In addition,
under our Outside Directors Stock Option Plan, we have
granted to each director who is not our employee, upon the
directors initial appointment to the Board, options to
purchase 30,000 shares of our common stock and plan, each
year thereafter, to grant options to purchase an additional
11,000 shares of our common stock. The exercise price for
these options is the fair market value of our common stock at
the time of the grant of the options. For each grant of options,
one quarter of the options vest after one year, and the
remainder vest ratably by quarter over the succeeding three
years. The options have a term of seven years. All directors
were entitled to receive $2,500 per day for each Board and
committee meeting attended in person and $1,250 for each
telephonic Board and committee meeting attended. Directors are
also reimbursed for all reasonable expenses incurred in
connection with attendance at any of these meetings.
Mr. Roche has waived these fees and option grants.
The following table sets forth a summary of the compensation
earned by our non-employee directors for services in fiscal year
2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Option
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Cash Fees
|
|
Awards
|
|
Awards(3)
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Dr. James C. Castle
|
|
$
|
84,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
82,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
166,593
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Leslie G. Denend
|
|
$
|
87,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
82,592
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
170,342
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alex W. (Pete) Hart
|
|
$
|
57,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
88,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
145,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert B. Henske
|
|
$
|
92,333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
81,405
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
173,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eitan Raff(1)
|
|
$
|
3,333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,915
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles R. Rinehart
|
|
$
|
68,583
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
96,638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
165,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collin E. Roche(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Raff joined the VeriFone board of directors on
October 1, 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Roche waived all compensation during fiscal year 2007. |
|
(3) |
|
Amounts shown in this column reflect our accounting expense for
these awards and do not reflect whether the recipient has
actually realized a financial benefit from the awards (such as
by exercising stock options). This column represents the dollar
amount recognized for financial statement reporting purposes
with respect to fiscal year 2007 for the fair value of stock
options granted to non-employee directors. The fair value was
estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model in
accordance with SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based
Payment. Pursuant to SEC rules, amounts shown exclude the
impact of estimated forfeitures related to service-based vesting
conditions. For additional information, including information on
the valuation assumptions with respect to grants made prior to
fiscal year 2007 refer to Note 7
Stockholders Equity of the notes to consolidated
financial statements included herein. |
148
Compensation
Committee Report
The Compensation Committee of VeriFone (the Compensation
Committee) consists exclusively of independent directors.
The general purpose of the Compensation Committee is to
(1) review and approve corporate goals and objectives
relating to the compensation of VeriFones CEO, evaluate
the CEOs performance in light of those goals and
objectives and, either as a committee or together with the other
independent directors (as directed by the Board), determine and
approve the CEOs compensation level based on this
evaluation and (2) make recommendations to the Board with
respect to non-CEO compensation, incentive-compensation plans,
and equity-based plans, among other things. VeriFones
Board of Directors and its Corporate Governance and Nominating
Committee have determined that each member of the Compensation
Committee is independent within the meaning of the
rules of both the NYSE and the SEC.
The Board of Directors determined, upon the recommendation of
the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, that each
member of the Compensation Committee is independent
within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE.
During fiscal year 2007, the Committee performed all of its
duties and responsibilities under the Compensation
Committees charter. Additionally, as part of its
responsibilities, the Committee reviewed the section of this
Form 10-K
entitled Compensation Discussion and Analysis
(CD&A), as prepared by management of VeriFone, and
discussed the CD&A with management of VeriFone; Compensia,
an independent compensation consultant to the Compensation
Committee, also reviewed and commented on the CD&A. Based
on its review and discussions, the Committee recommended to the
Board of Directors that the CD&A be included in the 2008
Proxy Statement and this
Form 10-K.
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
Leslie G. Denend, Chair
Robert B. Henske
Collin E. Roche
Audit
Committee Report
The purpose of the Audit Committee of VeriFone is to assist the
Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibility to
the stockholders, potential stockholders, the investment
community, and others relating to: (i) the integrity of
VeriFones financial statements; (ii) VeriFones
compliance with legal and regulatory requirements;
(iii) VeriFones independent registered public
accounting firms qualifications and independence;
(iv) the performance of VeriFones internal audit
function and independent registered public accounting firm;
(v) the retention of VeriFones independent registered
public accounting firm; and (vi) the preparation of this
report.
The Board of Directors has determined, upon the recommendation
of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, that each
member of the Audit Committee is independent within
the meaning of the rules of the NYSE and the SEC. The Audit
Committee currently consists of Dr. Denend and
Mr. Rinehart, as well as Mr. Henske, as chairman, whom
the Board of Directors has designated as an Audit
Committee financial expert within the meaning of
applicable SEC rules. Dr. Castle served as an Audit
Committee member through June 11, 2008.
As set forth in the Audit Committee charter, management is
responsible for the preparation, presentation, and integrity of
VeriFones financial statements, for the appropriateness of
the accounting principles and reporting policies that are used
by VeriFone and for implementing and maintaining internal
control over financial reporting. The independent registered
public accounting firm is responsible for auditing
VeriFones financial statements and for reviewing
VeriFones unaudited interim financial statements.
In fulfilling their responsibilities, it is recognized that
members of the Audit Committee are not full-time employees of
VeriFone and are not, and do not represent themselves to be,
performing the functions of auditors or accountants. As such, it
is not the duty or responsibility of the Audit Committee or its
members to conduct field work or other types of
auditing or accounting reviews or procedures or to set auditor
independence standards.
149
Members of the Audit Committee necessarily rely on the
information provided to them by management and the independent
registered public accounting firm. Accordingly, the Audit
Committees considerations and discussions referred to
below do not assure that the audit of VeriFones financial
statements has been carried out in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles or that VeriFones auditors
are in fact independent.
In the performance of its oversight function, the Audit
Committee has considered and discussed the audited financial
statements with management and the independent registered public
accounting firm. The Audit Committee has also discussed with the
independent registered public accounting firm the matters
required to be discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards
No. 61, Communication with Audit Committees, as
currently in effect. In addition, the Audit Committee has
discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm
the auditors independence from VeriFone and its
management, including the matters in the written disclosures and
letter required by Independence Standards Board Standard
No. 1, Independence Discussions with Audit
Committees, a copy of which the Audit Committee has
received. All non-audit services performed by the registered
public accounting firm must be specifically pre-approved by the
Audit Committee or a member thereof.
In reliance on the reviews and discussions referred to above,
and subject to the limitations on the role and responsibilities
of the Audit Committee referred to above and in the Audit
Committee charter, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board
the inclusion of the audited financial statements in
VeriFones Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission.
AUDIT COMMITTEE
Robert B. Henske, Chair
Leslie G. Denend
Charles R. Rinehart
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
Beneficial
Ownership Information
The following table presents information concerning the
beneficial ownership of the shares of our common stock as of
July 31, 2008, by:
|
|
|
|
|
each person we know to be the beneficial owner of 5% of more of
our outstanding shares of common stock;
|
|
|
|
each of our executive officers;
|
|
|
|
each of our directors; and
|
|
|
|
all of our executive officers and directors as a group.
|
Beneficial ownership is determined under the rules of the SEC
and generally includes voting or investment power over
securities. Except in cases where community property laws apply
or as indicated in the footnotes to this table, we believe that
each stockholder identified in the table possesses sole voting
and investment power over all shares of common stock shown as
beneficially owned by the stockholder. Percentage of beneficial
ownership is based on 84,194,231 shares of common stock
outstanding as of July 31, 2008. Shares of common stock
subject to options that are currently exercisable or exercisable
within 60 days of July 31, 2008 are considered
outstanding and beneficially owned by the person holding the
options for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of
that person but are not treated as outstanding for the purpose
of computing the percentage ownership of any other
150
person. Unless indicated below, the address of each individual
listed below is
c/o VeriFone
Holdings, Inc., 2099 Gateway Place, Suite 600,
San Jose, California 95110.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner
|
|
Number
|
|
Class
|
|
Beneficial owners
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GTCR Fund VII, L.P.(1)
|
|
|
9,658,909
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
Capital Group International, Inc.(2)
|
|
|
8,394,830
|
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
Capital Research Global Investors(3)
|
|
|
8,760,800
|
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
Brookside Capital Partners Fund, L.P.(4)
|
|
|
4,609,000
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
Douglas G. Bergeron(5)
|
|
|
1,664,270
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
Isaac Angel(6)
|
|
|
364,476
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Barry Zwarenstein(7)
|
|
|
178,407
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Elmore Waller(8)
|
|
|
80,590
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
James C. Castle(9)
|
|
|
35,312
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Leslie G. Denend(10)
|
|
|
35,312
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Robert B. Henske(11)
|
|
|
34,999
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Charles Rinehart(12)
|
|
|
21,312
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Alex W. (Pete) Hart(13)
|
|
|
18,437
|
|
|
|
*
|
%
|
Collin E. Roche(1)
|
|
|
9,658,909
|
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
William Atkinson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eitan Raff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All directors and executive officers as a group (12 persons)
|
|
|
12,092,024
|
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
The address of each of GTCR Fund VII, L.P., GTCR Capital
Partners, L.P., GTCR Co-Invest, L.P. and Mr. Roche is
c/o GTCR
Golder Rauner, L.L.C., 6100 Sears Tower, Chicago, Illinois
60606. Beneficial ownership information includes
8,928,188 shares of common stock held by GTCR Fund VII,
L.P., 648,984 shares of common stock held by GTCR Capital
Partners, L.P., and 81,737 shares of common stock held by
GTCR Co-Invest, L.P. GTCR Golder Rauner, L.L.C. is the general
partner of the general partner of GTCR Fund VII, L.P., the
general partner of the general partner of the general partner of
GTCR Capital Partners, L.P., and the general partner of GTCR
Co-Invest, L.P. GTCR Golder Rauner, L.L.C., through a six-person
members committee (consisting of Mr. Roche, Philip A.
Canfield, David A. Donnini, Edgar D. Jannotta, Jr., Joseph P.
Nolan, and Bruce V. Rauner, with Mr. Rauner as the managing
member), has voting and dispositive authority over the shares
held by GTCR Fund VII, L.P., GTCR Capital Partners, L.P.,
and GTCR Co-Invest, L.P., and therefore beneficially owns such
shares. Decisions of the members committee with respect to the
voting and disposition of the shares are made by a vote of not
less than one-half of its members and the affirmative vote of
the managing member and, as a result, no single member of the
members committee has voting or dispositive authority over the
shares. Each of Messrs. Bondy, Roche, Canfield, Donnini,
Jannotta, Nolan, and Rauner, as well as Vincent J. Hemmer, David
F. Randell, George E. Sperzel and Daniel W. Yih are principals
of GTCR Golder Rauner, L.L.C., and each of them disclaims
beneficial ownership of the shares held by the GTCR funds. |
|
(2) |
|
The address of Capital Group International, Inc. is 11100 Santa
Monica Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90025. Capital Group
International, Inc. has sole voting power for
5,968,300 shares of common stock and sole dispositive power
for 8,394,830 shares of common stock and (ii) Capital
Guardian Trust Company has sole voting power for
5,417,500 shares of common stock and sole dispositive power
for 7,758,340 shares of common stock. This information is
based solely upon a Schedule 13G, as amended, filed by
Capital Group International, Inc. and Capital Guardian
Trust Company on February 11, 2008. |
151
|
|
|
(3) |
|
The address of Capital Research Global Investors
(CRGI) is 333 South Hope Street, Los Angeles,
California 90071. CRGI has the sole power to vote and
dispose of 8,760,800 shares of common stock. This
information is based solely upon a Schedule 13G filed by
CRGI on April 10, 2008. |
|
(4) |
|
The address of Brookside Capital Partners Fund, L.P. is 111
Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02199. Brookside
Capital Partners Fund, L.P. (Brookside) has the sole
power to vote and dispose of 4,609,000 shares of common
stock. Domenic Ferrante, as the sole managing member of
Brookside Capital Management, LLC (BCM), BCM as the
sole general partner of Brookside Capital Investors, L.P.
(BCI) and BCI, as the sole general partner of
Brookside, may each be deemed to share voting or investment
control over the shares. This information is based solely upon a
Schedule 13G filed by Brookside on January 14, 2008. |
|
(5) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 1,516,145 shares
held by various family trusts the beneficiaries of which are
members of Mr. Bergerons family. In addition,
148,125 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Mr. Bergeron represent shares (i) issuable upon the
exercise of options that are exercisable or will become
exercisable within 60 days after July 31, 2008 and
(ii) issuable upon vesting of restricted stock units that
will vest within 60 days of July 31, 2008. |
|
(6) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 101 shares held
by Mr. Angel directly. In addition, 364,375 shares
listed as beneficially owned by Mr. Angel represent shares
issuable upon the exercise of options that are exercisable or
will become exercisable within 60 days after July 31,
2008. |
|
(7) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 2,008 shares held
by Mr. Zwarenstein directly. In addition,
176,399 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Mr. Zwarenstein represent shares (i) issuable upon the
exercise of options that are exercisable or will become
exercisable prior to or on August 19, 2008 and
(ii) issuable upon vesting of restricted stock units that
will vest prior to or on August 19, 2008.
Mr. Zwarensteins employment was terminated as of
August 19, 2008. |
|
(8) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 1,875 shares held
by Mr. Waller directly. In addition, 78,715 shares
listed as beneficially owned by Mr. Waller represent shares
(i) issuable upon the exercise of options that are
exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after
July 31, 2008 and (ii) issuable upon vesting of
restricted stock units that will vest within 60 days of
July 31, 2008. |
|
(9) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 24,000 shares
held by Dr. Castle directly. In addition,
11,312 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Dr. Castle represent shares issuable upon the exercise of
options that are exercisable or will become exercisable within
60 days after July 31, 2008. |
|
(10) |
|
All 35,312 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Dr. Denend represent shares issuable upon the exercise of
options that are exercisable or will become exercisable within
60 days after July 31, 2008. |
|
(11) |
|
All 34,999 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Mr. Henske represent shares issuable upon the exercise of
options that are exercisable or will become exercisable within
60 days after July 31, 2008. |
|
(12) |
|
Beneficial ownership information includes 1,000 shares held
by Mr. Rinehart directly. In addition, 20,312 shares
listed as beneficially owned by Mr. Rinehart represent
shares issuable upon the exercise of options that are
exercisable or will become exercisable within 60 days after
July 31, 2008. |
|
(13) |
|
All 18,437 shares listed as beneficially owned by
Mr. Hart represent shares issuable upon the exercise of
options that are exercisable or will become exercisable within
60 days after July 31, 2008. |
152
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information as of October 31,
2007 regarding securities issued under our equity compensation
plans that were in effect during fiscal year 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
be Issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Remaining Available
|
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Exercise Price of
|
|
|
for Future Issuance
|
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
Under Equity
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
and Rights
|
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
Compensation Plans
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(1)
|
|
|
9,081,387
|
(2)
|
|
$
|
27.10
|
(3)
|
|
|
2,288,394
|
(4)
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
9,081,387
|
(2)
|
|
$
|
27.10
|
|
|
|
2,288,394
|
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This reflects our New Founders Stock Option Plan, Outside
Directors Stock Option Plan, 2005 Employee Equity
Incentive Plan, and 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. This information
also includes securities issuable pursuant to the Lipman
Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2003 Stock Option Plan, Lipman
Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2004 Stock Option Plan, Lipman
Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2004 Share Option Plan, and
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2006 Share Incentive
Plan as a result of our acquisition of Lipman Electronic
Engineering Ltd. on November 1, 2006. VeriFone does not
plan to issue securities in the future under any of the
foregoing plans other than the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes 600,000 shares that may be issued under restricted
stock unit awards that are subject to performance conditions. |
|
(3) |
|
Excludes 749,750 shares subject to restricted stock units
with an exercise price of $0 that were outstanding as of
October 31, 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents shares remaining available for future issuance under
our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. |
2006
Equity Incentive Plan
Our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan is the only plan under which we
currently make grants of equity awards. Our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan permits grants of stock options, stock
appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units,
performance shares and share units, dividend equivalent rights
and other stock awards. Grants may be made to our directors,
officers, and employees and other individuals performing
services for us. The plan authorizes the issuance of an
aggregate of 9,000,000 shares of our common stock. Any
shares granted as stock options or stock appreciation rights
shall be counted as one share issued under the plan for each
share so granted. Any shares granted as awards other than stock
options or stock appreciation rights shall be counted as
1.75 shares issued under the plan for each share so
granted. As of October 31, 2007, there were 5,062,300
options outstanding at a weighted-average exercise price of
$33.09 per share, of which 471,642 were exercisable at a
weighted-average exercise price of $29.16 per share, and there
were 749,750 restricted stock units outstanding, none of which
were exercisable.
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR
INDEPENDENCE
|
We occasionally enter into transactions with entities in which
an executive officer, director, 5% or more beneficial owner of
our common stock, or an immediate family member of these persons
have a direct or indirect material interest. The Audit Committee
reviews and approves each individual related party transaction
exceeding $120,000, and believes all of these transactions were
on terms that were reasonable and fair to us. The Audit
Committee also reviews and monitors on-going relationships with
related parties to ensure they continue to be on terms that are
reasonable and fair to us.
153
Indemnification
and Employment Agreements
As permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law, we have
adopted provisions in our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation that authorize and require us to indemnify our
officers and directors to the full extent permitted under
Delaware law, subject to limited exceptions. We have also
entered, and intend to continue to enter, into separate
indemnification agreements with each of our directors and
officers which may be broader than the specific indemnification
provisions contained in Delaware law. Also, as described above,
we have entered into employment agreements with our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer.
Equity
Grants
We have granted stock options and restricted stock units to
purchase shares of our common stock to our executive officers
and directors and restricted stock units to certain of our
executive officers. See Compensation Discussion and
Analysis, Executive Compensation and
Director Compensation under
Item 10 Directors, Executive Officers of
the Registrant and Corporate Governance.
Director
Independence
For a member of our Board of Directors (the Board)
to be considered independent under NYSE rules, the Board must
determine that the director does not have a material
relationship with VeriFone
and/or its
consolidated subsidiaries (either directly or as a partner,
stockholder, or officer of an organization that has a
relationship with any of those entities). The Board has
determined that Dr. Castle, Dr. Denend, Mr. Hart,
Mr. Henske, Mr. Rinehart, Mr. Raff, and
Mr. Roche are independent under NYSE rules. In addition,
the Board made a determination in 2007 that Mr. Craig
Bondy, a former member of our Board who resigned from our Board
effective October 1, 2007, was independent under the NYSE
rules.
Our Board has undertaken a review of the independence of our
directors in accordance with standards that the Board and the
Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee have established
to assist the Board in making independence determinations. Any
relationship listed under the heading Material
Relationships below will, if present, be deemed material
for the purposes of determining director independence. If a
director has any relationship that is considered material, the
director will not be considered independent. Any relationship
listed under the heading Immaterial Relationships
below will be considered categorically immaterial for the
purpose of determining director independence. Multiple
Immaterial Relationships will not collectively
create a material relationship that would cause the director to
not be considered independent. In addition, the fact that a
particular relationship is not addressed under the heading
Immaterial Relationships will not automatically
cause a director to not be independent. If a particular
relationship is not addressed under the standards established by
the Board, the Board will review all of the facts and
circumstances of the relationship to determine whether or not
the relationship, in the Boards judgment, is material.
Material
Relationships
Any of the following shall be considered material relationships
that would prevent a director from being determined to be
independent:
Auditor Affiliation. The director is a current
partner or employee of VeriFones internal or external
auditor or a member of the directors immediate family
(including the directors spouse; parents; children;
siblings; mothers-, fathers-, brothers-, sisters-, sons-, and
daughters-in-law;
and anyone who shares the directors home, other than
household employees) is a current employee of such auditor who
participates in the firms audit, assurance, or tax
compliance (but not tax planning) practice or a current partner
of such auditor. Or the director or an immediate family member
of the director was a partner or employee of the firm who
personally worked on VeriFones audit within the last five
years.
Business Transactions. The director is an
employee of another entity that, during any one of the past five
years, received payments from VeriFone, or made payments to
VeriFone, for property or services that exceeded the greater of
$1 million or 2% of the other entitys annual
consolidated gross revenues. Or a member of the directors
immediate family has been an executive officer of another entity
that, during any one of the past five
154
years, received payments from VeriFone, or made payments to
VeriFone, for property or services that exceeded the greater of
$1 million or 2% of the other entitys annual
consolidated gross revenues.
Employment. The director was an employee of
VeriFone at any time during the past five years or a member of
the directors immediate family was an executive officer of
VeriFone in the prior five years.
Interlocking Directorships. During the past
five years, the director or an immediate family member of the
director was employed as an executive officer by another entity
where one of VeriFones current executive officers served
at the same time on the Compensation Committee.
Other Compensation. A director or an immediate
family member of a director received more than $100,000 per year
in direct compensation from VeriFone, other than director and
committee fees, in the past five years.
Professional Services. A director is a partner
or officer of an investment bank or consulting firm that
performs substantial services to VeriFone on a regular basis.
Immaterial
Relationships
The following relationships shall be considered immaterial for
purposes of determining director independence:
Affiliate of Stockholder. A relationship
arising solely from a directors status as an executive
officer, principal, equity owner, or employee of an entity that
is a stockholder of VeriFone.
Certain Business Transactions. A relationship
arising solely from a directors status as an executive
officer, employee or equity owner of an entity that has made
payments to or received payments from VeriFone for property or
services shall not be deemed a material relationship or
transaction that would cause a director not to be independent so
long as the payments made or received during any one of such
other entitys last five fiscal years are not in excess of
the greater of $1 million or 2% of such other entitys
annual consolidated gross revenues.
Director Fees. The receipt by a director from
VeriFone of fees for service as a member of the Board and
committees of the Board.
Other Relationships. Any relationship or
transaction that is not covered by any of the standards listed
above in which the amount involved does not exceed $25,000 in
any fiscal year shall not be deemed a material relationship or
transaction that would cause a director not to be independent.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no relationship shall be deemed
categorically immaterial pursuant to this section to the extent
that it is required to be disclosed in SEC filings under
Item 404 of the SECs
Regulation S-K.
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
|
Fees Paid
to Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The following table shows information about fees paid by
VeriFone and its subsidiaries to Ernst & Young LLP
during the fiscal years ended October 31, 2007 and 2006 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approved by
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approved by
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Audit Committee
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Audit Committee
|
|
|
Audit fees
|
|
$
|
16,776
|
(1)
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,749
|
(2)
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
Audit-related fees
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
Tax fees
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
All other fees
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fees
|
|
$
|
17,131
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,918
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Audit fees in 2007 included fees related to the restatement of
the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for the three
months ended January 31, April 30 and July 31, 2007. |
155
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Audit fees in 2006 included fees incurred related to SEC
registration statements filed in connection with our Lipman
acquisition. |
Audit-Related Fees. This category consists of
assurance and related services provided by
Ernst & Young LLP that are reasonably
related to the performance of the audit or review of our
financial statements and are not reported above under
Audit Fees. The services for the fees disclosed
under this category primarily include employee benefit plan
audits, due diligence related to acquisitions and consultations
concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.
Tax Fees. This category consists of
professional services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP,
primarily in connection with our tax compliance activities,
including the preparation of tax returns in certain overseas
jurisdictions, consultation on tax matters, tax advice relating
to transactions and other tax planning and advice.
All Other Fees. This category consists of fees
for products and services other than the services reported above.
Audit
Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
As required by Section 10A(i)(1) of the Exchange Act, our
Audit Committee has adopted a pre-approval policy requiring that
the Audit Committee pre-approve all audit and permissible
non-audit services to be performed by Ernst & Young
LLP. Any proposed service that has received pre-approval but
which will exceed pre-approved cost limits will require separate
pre-approval by the Audit Committee. In addition, pursuant to
Section 10A(i)(3) of the Exchange Act, the Audit Committee
has established procedures by which the Audit Committee may from
time to time delegate pre-approval authority to the Chairman of
the Audit Committee. If the Chairman exercises this authority,
he must report any pre-approval decisions to the full Audit
Committee at its next meeting.
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS,
FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K:
1. Consolidated Financial Statements
The consolidated financial statements required to be filed in
the Annual Report on
Form 10-K
are listed in Item 8 hereof.
2. Exhibits
The documents set forth below are filed herewith or incorporated
by reference to the location indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1(4)
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Registrant
|
|
3
|
.2(5)
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant
|
|
4
|
.1(3)
|
|
Specimen Common Stock Certificate
|
|
4
|
.2(2)
|
|
Stockholders Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2002, by and
among VeriFone Holdings, Inc., GTCR Fund VII, L.P., GTCR
Co-Invest, L.P., GTCR Capital Partners, L.P., TCW/Crescent
Mezzanine Partners III, L.P., TCW/Crescent Mezzanine
Trust III, TCW/Crescent Mezzanine Partners III
Netherlands, L.P. and TCW Leveraged Income Trust IV, L.P.,
VF Holding Corp. and the executives who are parties thereto
|
|
4
|
.2.1(4)
|
|
Form of Amendment to Stockholders Agreement
|
156
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
4
|
.3(1)
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2002, by
and among VeriFone Holdings, Inc., GTCR Fund VII, L.P.,
GTCR Co-Invest, L.P., GTCR Capital Partners, L.P., TCW/Crescent
Mezzanine Partners III, L.P., TCW/Crescent Mezzanine
Trust III, TCW/Crescent Mezzanine Partners III
Netherlands, L.P., and TCW Leveraged Income Trust IV, L.P.,
VF Holding Corp., Jesse Adams, William Atkinson, Douglas G.
Bergeron, Nigel Bidmead, Denis Calvert, Donald Campion, Robert
Cook, Gary Grant, Robert Lopez, James Sheehan, David Turnbull
and Elmore Waller
|
|
4
|
.4(1)
|
|
Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of
November 30, 2004, by and among VeriFone Holdings, Inc.,
GTCR Fund VII, L.P., Douglas Bergeron, DGB Investments,
Inc., The Douglas G. Bergeron Family Annuity Trust, The Sandra
E. Bergeron Family Annuity Trust and The Bergeron Family Trust
|
|
4
|
.5(11)
|
|
Indenture related to the 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes
due 2012, dated as of June 22, 2007, between VeriFone
Holdings, Inc. and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee
|
|
4
|
.6(11)
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of June 22, 2007,
between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and Lehman Brothers Inc. and
J.P. Morgan Securities Inc.
|
|
10
|
.1(2)
|
|
Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2002, by and among
VeriFone Holdings, Inc., GTCR Fund VII, L.P., GTCR
Co-Invest, L.P., TCW/Crescent Mezzanine Partners III, L.P.,
TCW/Crescent Mezzanine Trust III, TCW/Crescent Mezzanine
Partners III Netherlands, L.P. and TCW Leveraged Income
Trust IV, L.P.
|
|
10
|
.1.1(4)
|
|
Form of Amendment No. 1 to Purchase Agreement
|
|
10
|
.2(1)+
|
|
Senior Management Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2002,
among VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc. and Douglas G.
Bergeron
|
|
10
|
.2.1(2)+
|
|
Amendment to Senior Management Agreement, dated as of
June 29, 2004, by and among VeriFone Holdings, Inc.,
VeriFone, Inc. and Douglas G. Bergeron
|
|
10
|
.3(1)+
|
|
Amendment to Senior Management Agreement, dated as of
December 27, 2004, by and among VeriFone Holdings, Inc.,
VeriFone, Inc. and Douglas Bergeron
|
|
10
|
.4(1)+
|
|
2002 Securities Purchase Plan
|
|
10
|
.5(1)+
|
|
New Founders Stock Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.6(1)+
|
|
Change in Control Severance Agreement, effective July 1,
2004, between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and Barry Zwarenstein
|
|
10
|
.7(3)+
|
|
Outside Directors Stock Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.8(1)
|
|
Patent License Agreement, effective as of November 1, 2004,
by and between NCR Corporation and VeriFone, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.9(6)+
|
|
2005 Employee Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.10(5)+
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement
|
|
10
|
.11(7)+
|
|
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. 2006 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.12(7)+
|
|
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Bonus Plan
|
|
10
|
.13(8)
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated October 31, 2006, among VeriFone
Intermediate Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc., various financial
institutions and other persons from time to time parties
thereto, as lenders, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as the
administrative agent for the lenders, Lehman Commercial Paper
Inc., as the syndication agent for the lenders, Bank Leumi USA
and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as the
co-documentation
agents for the lenders, and J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. and
Lehman Brothers Inc., as joint lead arrangers and joint book
running managers
|
|
10
|
.14(9)+
|
|
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2003 Stock Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.15(9)+
|
|
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2004 Stock Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.16(9)+
|
|
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2004 Share Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.17(9)+
|
|
Amendment to Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2004 Share
Option Plan
|
|
10
|
.18(9)+
|
|
Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. 2006 Share Incentive
Plan
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.19(10)+
|
|
Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated January 4,
2007, among VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc., and Douglas
G. Bergeron
|
|
10
|
.20(11)
|
|
Confirmation of Convertible Note Hedge Transaction, dated
June 18, 2007, by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and
Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives Inc.
|
|
10
|
.21(11)
|
|
Confirmation of Convertible Note Hedge Transaction, dated
June 18, 2007, by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, London Branch
|
|
10
|
.22(11)
|
|
Confirmation of Warrant Transaction, dated June 18, 2007,
by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and Lehman Brothers OTC
Derivatives Inc.
|
|
10
|
.23(11)
|
|
Confirmation of Warrant Transaction, dated June 18, 2007,
by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
National Association, London Branch
|
|
10
|
.24(11)
|
|
Amendment to Confirmation of Warrant Transaction, dated
June 21, 2007, by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and
Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives Inc.
|
|
10
|
.25(11)
|
|
Amendment to Confirmation of Warrant Transaction, dated
June 21, 2007, by and between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, London Branch
|
|
10
|
.26(12)+
|
|
Confidential Separation Agreement, dated August 2, 2007,
between VeriFone Holdings, Inc. and William G. Atkinson
|
|
21
|
.1*
|
|
List of subsidiaries of the Registrant
|
|
23
|
.1*
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
31
|
.1*
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer, as required by
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2*
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer, as required by
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1*
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer as required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
+ |
|
Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan or
arrangement. |
|
(1) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 1 to the
Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-121947),
filed February 23, 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 2 to the
Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-121947),
filed March 28, 2005. |
|
(3) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 3 to the
Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-121947),
filed April 18, 2005. |
|
(4) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 4 to the
Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-121947),
filed April 21, 2005. |
|
(5) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to Amendment No. 5 to the
Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(File
No. 333-121947),
filed April 29, 2005. |
|
(6) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to the Registrants Registration
Statement on
Form S-8
(File
No. 333-124545),
filed May 2, 2005. |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated by reference in the Registrants Current
Report on
Form 8-K,
filed March 23, 2006. |
|
(8) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to the Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K,
filed November 1, 2006. |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated by reference in the Registrants Registration
Statement on
Form S-8
(File
No. 333-138533),
filed November 9, 2006. |
|
(10) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to the Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K,
filed January 5, 2007. |
|
(11) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to the Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K,
filed June 22, 2007. |
|
(12) |
|
Filed as an exhibit to the Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K,
filed August 3, 2007. |
158
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report on Annual Report on
Form 10-K
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
VERIFONE HOLDINGS, INC.
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ DOUGLAS
G. BERGERON
|
Douglas G. Bergeron,
Chief Executive Officer
August 19, 2008
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report on Annual Report on
Form 10-K
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DOUGLAS
G. BERGERON
Douglas
G. Bergeron
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
(principal executive officer)
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ BARRY
ZWARENSTEIN
Barry
Zwarenstein
|
|
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial and accounting officer)
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES
C. CASTLE
James
C. Castle
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ LESLIE
G. DENEND
Leslie
G. Denend
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ALEX
W. HART
Alex
W. Hart
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT
B. HENSKE
Robert
B. Henske
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ EITAN
RAFF
Eitan
Raff
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ COLLIN
E. ROCHE
Collin
E. Roche
|
|
Director
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ CHARLES
R. RINEHART
Charles
R. Rinehart
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
|
August 19, 2008
|
159