10-K 1 d10k.htm FORM 10-K Form 10-K
Table of Contents

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 


 

FORM 10-K

 


 

FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS

PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

(Mark One)

 

x ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

 

OR

 

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from ______________ to ______________

 

Commission File Number: 000-50460

 

Tessera Technologies, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

 

Delaware   16-1620029
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)   (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

3099 Orchard Drive

San Jose, California 95134

  (408) 894-0700
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)   (Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:    None

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:    Common stock, par value $0.001 per share

 

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  x  No  ¨

 

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 registrant’s 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.  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).  Yes  x  No  ¨

 

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, based upon the closing sale price of common stock as reported on the Nasdaq National Market, on March 11, 2005 was $43.18.

 

As of March 11, 2005, 43,267,697 shares of the registrant’s common stock were outstanding.

 


 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

 

Portions of the Definitive Proxy Statement for registrant’s 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held May 19, 2005 will be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year and are incorporated by reference in Part III.

 



Table of Contents

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

          Page

     PART I     

Item 1.

   Business    1

Item 2.

   Properties    12

Item 3.

   Legal Proceedings    12

Item 4.

   Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders    13
     PART II     

Item 5.

   Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters    13

Item 6.

   Selected Financial Data    14

Item 7.

   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations    15

Item 7A.

   Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risks    37

Item 8.

   Financial Statements and Supplementary Data    37

Item 9.

  

Changes in and Disagreements with Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

   37

Item 9A.

   Controls and Procedures    38

Item 9B.

   Other Information    39
     PART III     

Item 10.

   Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant    39

Item 11.

   Executive Compensation    39

Item 12.

  

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

   39

Item 13.

   Certain Relationships and Related Transactions    39

Item 14.

   Principal Accountant Fees and Services    39
     PART IV     

Item 15.

   Financial Statement Schedules, Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K    40

Signatures

   43


Table of Contents

PART I

 

Item 1.    Business

 

Corporate Information

 

This Annual Report (including the following section regarding Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations) contains forward-looking statements regarding our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates” and similar expressions or variations of such words are intended to identify forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying forward-looking statements in this Annual Report. Additionally, statements concerning future matters such as the development of new products, enhancements or technologies, sales levels, expense levels and other statements regarding matters that are not historical are forward-looking statements.

 

Although forward-looking statements in this Annual Report reflect the good faith judgment of our management, such statements can only be based on facts and factors currently known by us. Consequently, forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties and actual results and outcomes may differ materially from the results and outcomes discussed in or anticipated by the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in results and outcomes include without limitation those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors” below, as well as those discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report. Readers are urged not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. We undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements in order to reflect any event or circumstance that may arise after the date of this Annual Report. Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made in this Annual Report, which attempt to advise interested parties of the risks and factors that may affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

 

Tessera, Inc. was incorporated in Delaware in May 1990. In January 2003, pursuant to a corporate restructuring, Tessera Technologies, Inc., a newly formed Delaware corporation, became the parent holding company of Tessera, Inc. The primary purpose of the restructuring was to terminate certain rights of first refusal previously held by some of Tessera, Inc.’s stockholders with respect to sales of Tessera, Inc. stock. Tessera Technologies, Inc. has no material assets other than its shares of Tessera, Inc., and conducts all of its business and operations through Tessera, Inc. We do not intend to cause or permit shares of the capital stock of Tessera, Inc. to be issued or sold to any other person. However, this holding company structure could result in our stockholders having subordinate rights, as compared to any future stockholders of Tessera, Inc., in a liquidation, dissolution or reorganization of Tessera, Inc.

 

Our principal executive offices are located at 3099 Orchard Drive, San Jose, California 95134. Our telephone number is (408) 894-0700. We maintain a website at www.tessera.com. The reference to our website address does not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained on this website.

 

We own or have rights to trademarks and trade names that we use in conjunction with the operation of our business, including Tessera and Tessera Technologies. This annual report also includes trademarks and trade names of other parties.

 

In this annual report, the “Company,” “Tessera,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Tessera Technologies, Inc. and, for periods prior to our corporate restructuring in January 2003 or if the context otherwise requires, Tessera, Inc., which is our wholly-owned subsidiary.

 

Overview

 

We develop semiconductor packaging technology that meets the demand for miniaturization and increased performance of electronic products. We license our technology to our customers, enabling them to produce

 

1


Table of Contents

semiconductors that are smaller and faster, and incorporate more features. These semiconductors are utilized in a broad range of electronics products including digital cameras, MP3 players, personal computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles and wireless phones. In addition, by using our technology, we believe that our customers are also able to reduce the time-to-market and development costs of their semiconductors.

 

Our patented technology enables our customers to assemble semiconductor chips into chip-scale packages, or CSPs, that are almost as small as the chip itself. Our technology also enables multiple chips to be stacked vertically in a single three-dimensional multi-chip package that occupies almost the same circuit board area as a CSP. By reducing the size of the semiconductor package and shortening electrical connections between the chip and the circuit board, our technology allows further miniaturization and increased performance and functionality of electronic products. We achieve these benefits without sacrificing reliability by allowing movement within the package, thus addressing critical problems associated with thermally-induced stress which can occur when packages decrease in size.

 

We derive license fees and royalties based upon our intellectual property and generate fees for related services. Our technology has been widely adopted and is currently licensed to more than 50 companies, including Intel, Renesas, Samsung, Sharp, Texas Instruments and Toshiba. We believe that more than 100 companies across the semiconductor supply chain have invested in the materials, equipment and assembly infrastructure needed to manufacture products that incorporate our technology. As a result, our technology has been incorporated into more than 4.5 billion semiconductors worldwide, including more than 1.5 billion semiconductors shipped in 2004. According to Gartner Dataquest, the market for chip-scale packaging is expected to grow from 11.2 billion units in 2004 to 23.4 billion in 2007, representing a compound annual growth rate of 28%. We believe that we are well-positioned to take advantage of this significant expected growth in CSPs.

 

Beginning in 2005, management anticipates organizing its operations into two business units: Technology Licensing Division and System Miniaturization Services Division. Accordingly, we anticipate reporting financial information for these business units as required by SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information.”

 

Industry Background

 

Packaged semiconductor chips, which we refer to as semiconductors, are essential components in a broad range of communications, computing and consumer electronic products. According to the Semiconductor Industry Association, worldwide semiconductor sales totaled $213.0 billion in 2004 and are expected to grow to $259.4 billion in 2007. Many electronic products require increasingly complex semiconductors that are smaller and higher-performing, integrate more features and functions and are less expensive to product than previous generations of semiconductors. Satisfying the demand for these complex semiconductors requires advances in semiconductor design, manufacturing and packaging technologies.

 

The disaggregation of the semiconductor industry and the emergence of intellectual property companies

 

Historically, most semiconductor companies were vertically integrated. They designed, fabricated, packaged and tested their semiconductors using internally developed software design tools and manufacturing processes and equipment. As the cost and skills required for designing and manufacturing complex semiconductors have increased, the semiconductor industry has become disaggregated, with companies concentrating on one or more individual stages of the semiconductor development and production process. This disaggregation has fueled the growth of fabless semiconductor companies, design tool vendors, semiconductor equipment manufacturers, third-party semiconductor manufacturers, or foundries, semiconductor assembly, package and test companies and intellectual property companies that develop and license technology to others.

 

While specialization has enabled greater development and manufacturing efficiency, it has also created an opportunity for intellectual property companies that develop and license technology to meet fundamental,

 

2


Table of Contents

industry-wide challenges. These intellectual property companies gain broad adoption of their technology throughout the industry by working with companies within the semiconductor supply chain to invest in the infrastructure needed to support their technology. This collaboration and investment benefits semiconductor companies by enabling them to bring new technology to market faster and more cost-effectively, without having to make the investment themselves.

 

Demand for system-level miniaturization and increased performance

 

Miniaturization of electronic products, or system-level miniaturization, is a significant challenge for manufacturers of electronic products and their suppliers, including semiconductor companies. Digital cameras, MP3 players, personal computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles, wireless phones and other electronic products are being made smaller with improved performance and an increasing number of advanced features. Semiconductor companies have traditionally responded to these challenges by shrinking the size of the basic semiconductor building block, or transistor, allowing for more transistors to be integrated on a single chip. For decades, the consistent reduction in transistor size has resulted in higher-performance, lower-cost chips that require less silicon area. In addition, transistors have become small enough to make it economical to combine multiple functions, such as logic, memory and analog functions, on a single chip, in what is commonly referred to as a system-on-a-chip.

 

Importance of semiconductor packaging

 

While the integration of increased functionality on a chip is critical to the miniaturization of electronic products, its impact has been limited by packaging technology, which has not kept pace with the advancements achieved by chip integration. Semiconductor chips are typically assembled in packages that act as the physical and electrical interface between the chip and the printed circuit board. The package protects the chip from breakage, contamination and stress. In addition, the package enables a chip to be easily tested prior to its incorporation into a system, enabling high system yields lowering the total system cost. Traditional semiconductor packages are much larger than the chip itself and occupy significant circuit board and system area. Also, traditional packaging technologies are less capable of accommodating faster semiconductor speeds due to the package’s longer electrical connections. Due to these limitations, traditional semiconductor packages are not well suited to meet the increasing demand for product miniaturization, functionality and performance. As a result, in addition to continuing advancements in chip integration, advanced packaging technology is required to achieve further miniaturization and higher performance cost-effectively.

 

Our Solution

 

We are a leading provider of intellectual property for chip-scale and multi-chip packaging that meets the increasing demand for miniaturization and performance of electronic products. We license a substantial portion of our intellectual property under our Tessera Compliant Chip, or TCC, license. This license primarily covers our core chip-scale and multi-chip packaging patents. In addition, we support the adoption of our technology by providing our customers with engineering services focused on addressing key issues related to the miniaturization and performance of electronics products. Our packaging technology provides the following benefits which are not provided by traditional packaging technologies:

 

Miniaturization.    Our CSP technology enables fully-packaged chips to be almost as small as the chip itself, which permits increased product miniaturization and functionality. Our multi-chip packaging technology extends this benefit by enabling multiple semiconductors to be stacked vertically, while occupying about the same circuit board area as a CSP. For example, our technology is broadly used to produce Flash memory and static random access memory, or SRAM, devices stacked in a multi-chip package utilized in wireless phones. As a result, we believe our multi-chip technology will enable electronic products to achieve new levels of miniaturization.

 

High performance.    Our technology offers shorter electrical connections between the chip and circuit board and between adjacent chips. Shorter connections allow information to be more rapidly transferred between the

 

3


Table of Contents

semiconductors and the system, yielding better system performance. Our technology has been widely adopted for use in high-speed memory applications, such as high-performance personal computers, network switches and routers, set-top boxes, workstations and video game consoles, such as the Sony PlayStation®2.

 

High reliability.    The miniaturization of semiconductors often presents reliability problems because the shorter connections are more vulnerable to breakage due to thermally-induced stress and mechanical shock. Overcoming these problems has been one of the most significant technical challenges in shrinking semiconductor packages to the size of the chip itself. Our technology alleviates these problems by allowing movement within the package. As a result, our technology provides high reliability without the increased package size or cost of competing technologies for a broad range of applications that require miniaturization.

 

Cost effectiveness.    The significant investment made by semiconductor chip makers, assemblers, and material and equipment providers in the manufacturing infrastructure that supports our technology enables high-volume production and broad availability of semiconductors that incorporate our technology. This in turn has reduced the cost of manufacturing products that incorporate our technology, allowing it to be used in cost-sensitive semiconductor applications such as dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, Flash memory or SRAM. We believe that this broad adoption and high volume production of our technology will further increase its cost-effectiveness.

 

Our Strategy

 

Our objective is to be the leading developer and licensor of chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technologies that meet the increasing demand for miniaturization and performance in a broad range of communication, computing and consumer electronic products. The following are key elements of our strategy:

 

Expand the market penetration of our CSP technology.    Our patented CSP technology has been incorporated in over 4.5 billion semiconductors worldwide. As a result of the broad adoption of our technology and existing infrastructure that supports our technology, we believe that we are well positioned to benefit from the substantial growth projected for the CSP market. We intend to further increase our share of the CSP market by:

 

    continuing to target and optimize our technology for large, growing product markets such as digital cameras, MP3 players, personal computers, personal digital assistants, video game consoles and wireless phones;

 

    making continued design, process and cost improvements that drive the incorporation of our technology in new semiconductor applications, such as application specific integrated circuits, or ASIC semiconductors, high-performance DRAM, and other logic applications; and

 

    identifying and approaching companies whose current products potentially incorporate our technology, offering them licenses to our technology, and when necessary, enforcing our intellectual property rights to obtain compensation for the use of our technology.

 

Accelerate the market acceptance of our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology.    Our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology extends our CSP technology by enabling multiple chips to be stacked vertically, while occupying about the same circuit board area as a CSP. This technology is designed for products in which miniaturization and feature integration are critical, including digital cameras, MP3 players, personal digital assistants and wireless phones. We intend to accelerate the adoption of our three-dimensional multi-chip packaging technology by:

 

    collaborating with our customers to develop multi-chip packages to meet their specific product requirements;

 

    capitalizing on the existing materials, equipment and assembly infrastructure that supports our CSP technology; and

 

4


Table of Contents
    continuing to reduce the cost of manufacturing semiconductors that incorporate our multi-chip technology through internal development and collaboration with leading semiconductor materials and equipment companies.

 

Provide engineering services to develop and promote the adoption of our technology.    We intend to continue to use our engineering services to accelerate the adoption of our technology, better understand our customers’ advanced packaging requirements, and develop and broaden our intellectual property portfolio. For example, we provide our customers with a broad range of services, such as package design, prototype manufacturing and reliability analysis, to help them develop products that incorporate our technology. This collaboration allows us to better understand our customers’ future product and packaging technology requirements. We have generated a substantial portion of our service revenues by providing our engineering services to various government agencies. These relationships contribute to the development of our advanced packaging technologies such as three-dimensional multi-chip packaging.

 

Utilize and enhance the infrastructure supporting our technology.    For more than a decade, we have collaborated with our infrastructure partners to help them develop and make widely available low-cost materials, equipment and assembly capacity to manufacture products that incorporate our technology. We design new technologies that are compatible with this existing infrastructure, which facilitates more rapid adoption of these new technologies. We plan to continue to work with our infrastructure partners to expand the adoption of our technology.

 

Broaden our intellectual property portfolio.    We intend to continue to broaden our patent portfolio through internal development, strategic relationships and acquisitions, to enhance the competitiveness and size of our current businesses and diversify into markets and technologies that complement our current businesses. For example, we intend to extend our intellectual property portfolio in the area of radio frequency, or RF, module packaging technology for a broad range of wireless applications. We also intend to continue to utilize our core competency in aggregating and licensing intellectual property to grow and expand our business.

 

Create demand by collaborating with system manufacturers and electronic manufacturing service providers.    We work with leading system manufacturers and electronic manufacturing service providers to increase demand for our chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technology. Through these relationships, we align our research and development efforts to better meet their needs. This helps us to develop technologies such as packaging for RF modules, which can be used in new, growing markets, such as Bluetooth, global positioning systems and Wi-Fi.

 

Our Technology and Services

 

We derive the majority of our revenues from license fees and royalties associated with our TCC license. Our TCC license grants a worldwide right to develop, assemble, use and sell certain CSPs and multi-chip packages. The licensed technology primarily includes issued patents and pending patent applications during the term of the license. We also license components of our intellectual property portfolio outside of the TCC license, such as module and passive component technology suitable for RF products. In addition, we provide a broad range of engineering, assembly and infrastructure services to our customers.

 

Our Technology

 

Our packaging technology is incorporated into semiconductors for use in a broad range of communication, computing and consumer electronics applications. These semiconductors include:

 

   

Digital signal processor, or DSP, semiconductors, Flash memory, SRAM and certain ASIC semiconductors, for use in wireless communication and digital consumer products, such as digital cameras, MP3 players, personal digital assistants and wireless phones. These markets are expected to enjoy strong growth. For example, Gartner Dataquest projects the market for CSP-based DSP

 

5


Table of Contents
 

semiconductors will grow from 158 million units in 2004 to 296 million units in 2007, representing a compound annual growth rate of 23%. Gartner Dataquest also projects the combined Flash memory and SRAM markets to grow from 2.4 billion units in 2004 to 2.0 billion units in 2006, a compound annual growth rate of 8%.

 

    DRAM, for use in computing, networking and home entertainment applications, such as personal computers, network switches and routers, set-top boxes and video game consoles. According to Gartner Dataquest, the market for CSP-based DRAM is expected to grow from 1 billion units in 2004 to 4.1 billion units in 2007, a compound annual growth rate of 58%.

 

Chip-Scale Package Technology Platforms

 

Although most of our licensees have developed their own proprietary packages incorporating our intellectual property, we have developed the following CSP platforms which are included in our TCC license:

 

Micro Ball Grid Array, or µBGA®, Platform.    Our µBGA® platform includes the lead-bonded µBGA® package and the µBGA®-W package, an alternative that uses wire-bonding as opposed to lead bonding as the package’s internal electrical interconnect. In the µBGA® platform the chip is oriented face-down in the package with its contacts facing the circuit board. We believe this CSP platform offers the best combination of features to meet the requirements of high-performance DRAM semiconductors.

 

µBGA®-F Platform.    The µBGA®-F platform has the chip oriented face-up in the package, with its contacts facing away from the circuit board, and utilizes standard wire-bonding for the package’s internal electrical interconnect. The technology underlying this platform has been broadly adopted and incorporated into a large number of customer-developed proprietary packages for DSP semiconductors, Flash memory, SRAM and ASIC semiconductors used in wireless communication and consumer electronics products.

 

Multi-Chip Package Technology Platforms

 

Our technology is incorporated into a number of three-dimensional multi-chip packages used in wireless communication and digital consumer applications, such as digital cameras, MP3 players, personal digital assistants and wireless phones. These packages include various combinations of ASIC, DSP, Flash memory and SRAM semiconductors. In addition, we have developed a family of three-dimensional multi-chip platforms, which are collectively referred to as the µZ® Stacked Package family, to extend this innovative technology into new applications to meet the growing demand for higher levels of integration in computing, communications and consumer electronics.

 

We also develop and offer solutions which incorporate RF devices in three-dimensional platforms for wireless applications. In addition to wireless phones, which typically incorporate multiple RF sections or modules, several initiatives such as Bluetooth and Wi-Fi are aimed at incorporating additional RF capability into a broad range of handheld, computing and consumer electronic products.

 

We expect these platforms to build upon the existing CSP infrastructure and to enable further miniaturization and increased performance and functionality for a broad range of cost-sensitive, high volume applications. Each platform was developed to resolve complex, technical and business challenges inherent in the miniaturization of electronic products.

 

We offer the following multi-chip platforms:

 

µZ® Chip Stack Platform.    The µZ® chip stack platform consists of two or more semiconductors, stacked vertically on top of each other and wire-bonded to the package substrate. This is a cost-effective, versatile platform that can be used in a broad range of semiconductors and product applications. The technology underlying this platform has been broadly adopted and incorporated into a large number of customer-developed

 

6


Table of Contents

proprietary stacked multi-chip packages for Flash memory, SRAM, and ASIC semiconductors, that are used in wireless communication and consumer electronics products.

 

µZ® Fold-Over Stacked Platform.    We have recently introduced our µZ® Fold-Over Stacked platform to solve an industry-wide problem associated with the integration of different types of functional blocks, such as processor, memory and various analog blocks, onto a single system-on-a-chip. For example, this package enables DSP, ASIC and different memory semiconductors to be fully packaged, tested and then integrated, resulting in a high-yielding system-in-a-package. The µZ® Fold-Over Stacked platform provides a cost-effective solution that meets wireless phone package height requirements and saves valuable circuit board space, enabling wireless products that are smaller and lighter with more functionality.

 

µZ® Ball Stacked Platform.    We have also recently introduced our µZ® Ball Stacked platform as a multi-chip solution that enables the integration of high-performance DRAM while occupying 25% less circuit board area with 60% of the height of a traditional DRAM package. Because each semiconductor can be individually tested prior to being assembled in the multi-chip package, common yield problems associated with competing technologies can be overcome. Our µZ® Ball Stacked platform can be used for cost-sensitive, high-volume applications, including DRAM modules for high-performance personal computers, workstations and network switches and routers.

 

The following table provides a summary of the key features and semiconductor and system applications for each of our package technologies and the related platforms, all of which are included in our standard TCC license:

 

Chip-Scale
Package
Technology
  Technology
Platform
  Key Features   Semiconductor
Applications
  System Applications
  µBGA®  

•   Small

•   High performance

•   High reliability

  DRAM, Flash, SRAM   Digital TV, game console, personal computer, set-top box, server, wireless phone
  µBGA®W  

•   Small

•   High performance

•   High reliability

•   Wire-bond

  DRAM   Digital TV, game console, personal computer, servers, set-top box
  µBGA®F  

•   Small

•   Design flexibility

•   Low cost

•   Wire-bond

  ASIC, DSP, Flash, SRAM   Digital camera, MP3 player, personal digital assistant, wireless phone
Multi-Chip Package Technology   µZ® Chip Stack  

•   Vertical stack

•   Small

•   Wire-bond

•   Design flexibility

  Flash / SRAM stack   Digital camera, MP3 player, personal digital assistant, wireless phone
  µZ® Fold-Over Stack  

•   Pre-test

•   Stacked logic and memory

•   Enables system-in-a-package

•   Small

•   Low profile

•   2-4 semiconductor stack

•   High reliability

  Numerous logic / memory configurations   Digital camera, MP3 player, personal digital assistant, wireless phone
  µZ® Ball Stack  

•   Pre-test

•   Stacked memory

•   Small

•   Low profile

•   2-8 semiconductor stack

•   High reliability

  DRAM, Flash, numerous logic / memory configurations   Digital camera, MP3 player, personal computer, personal digital assistant, server, wireless phone

 

7


Table of Contents

Our Services

 

We provide our customers and partners with engineering, assembly and infrastructure services that we believe accelerate the adoption of our technology for a broad range of cost-sensitive, high-volume applications. We provide engineering services to semiconductor makers and assemblers, system manufacturers, electronic manufacturing service companies and government agencies and their contractors to enable the development of new packaging technologies. Most of our service revenues are derived from government-related engineering services.

 

Engineering services.    Our engineering services include customized package design and prototyping, modeling, simulation, failure analysis and reliability testing and related training services. We provide these services to semiconductor makers and assemblers, system manufacturers, electronic manufacturing service companies and government agencies and their contractors. We believe that offering these services accelerates the incorporation of our intellectual property into our customers’ products and aids in our understanding of their future packaging requirements.

 

Assembly services.    We provide training and consulting services to assist semiconductor assemblers in designing, implementing, upgrading and maintaining their CSP assembly lines. We also offer services to help customers address process, equipment, materials and other manufacturing-related issues. This allows our assembly customers to bring their manufacturing lines incorporating our technology into production more rapidly and cost-effectively.

 

Infrastructure services.    We offer evaluation, qualification, cost reduction and cost analysis services to companies that develop and manufacture equipment and materials to support the infrastructure needed to manufacture semiconductors that incorporate our technology. These services enable infrastructure customers to evaluate the impact of their specific materials and equipment on the manufacturability and reliability of our technology.

 

Customers

 

Our technology is currently licensed to more than 50 companies. The following table sets forth sales to customers comprising of 10% or more of total revenues for the periods indicated:

 

    

Years Ended

December 31,


 
         2004    

        2003    

        2002    

 

Texas Instruments, Inc

   20 %   28 %   23 %

Intel Corporation

   18 %   9 %   4 %

Sharp

   5 %   4 %   21 %

 

We have a TCC license with Texas Instruments, dated January 1, 2002, that covers the types of BGA packages that were the subject of our legal proceeding against Texas Instruments in the U.S. District Court. Under this license Texas Instruments paid a license fee and agreed to pay ongoing royalties on a quarterly basis. The license has termination provisions for breach, change of control and bankruptcy. In addition, Texas Instruments may unilaterally terminate the license by giving six months prior notice at any time. Unless earlier terminated, the license will terminate on December 31, 2013. If the license is not terminated prior to December 31, 2013, Texas Instruments will have a fully paid-up license under the Tessera patents subject to the license. Any termination of the agreement would result in a loss by Texas Instruments of its right to use our intellectual property.

 

A significant portion of our revenues is derived from licensees headquartered outside of the United States, principally in Asia, and we expect these revenues will continue to account for a significant portion of total

 

8


Table of Contents

revenues in future periods. The table below lists the geographic regions of our customers and the percentage of revenues derived from each region for the periods indicated:

 

    

Years Ended

December 31,


 
         2004    

        2003    

        2002    

 

United States

   56 %   61 %   44 %

Taiwan

   2 %   1 %   5 %

Singapore

   1 %   0 %   0 %

Korea

   9 %   4 %   8 %

Japan

   31 %   32 %   41 %

Other

   1 %   2 %   2 %

 

The international nature of our business exposes us to a number of risks, including but not limited to: laws and business practices favoring local companies; withholding tax obligations on license revenues that we may not be able to offset fully against our U.S. tax obligations, including the further risk that foreign tax authorities may re-characterize license fees or increase tax rates, which could result in increased tax withholdings and penalties; less effective protection of intellectual property than is afforded to us in the United States or other developed countries and international terrorism and anti-American sentiment, particularly in the emerging markets.

 

All of our long-lived assets are located in the United States.

 

The following is a list of our current licensees and, where indicated, our current sublicensees:

 

Semiconductor Manufacturers


  

Semiconductor Assemblers


  Semiconductor Material Suppliers

Advanced Micro Devices Inc.

Cochlear Corporation

Hitachi, Ltd.

Hynix Semiconductor America, Inc.

Intel Corp.

Matsushita (Panasonic)

Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc.

NEC Electronics Corporation (NEC)

Oki Electric Industry Co., Ltd. (OKI)

Renesas Technology Corp.*

ROHM Corp.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.

Seiko Epson Corp.

Sharp Corporation

Siemens AG

Sony Corp.

ST Microelectronics NV

Texas Instruments, Inc.

Toshiba

  

Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (ASE)

Akita Electronics Systems Co., Ltd.*

Amkor Technology, Inc.

ChipMOS Technologies, Inc.

ChipPAC, Inc.

EEMS Italia, SpA

Hitachi Cable, Ltd.

Mitsui High-tec Inc.

Renesas Northern Japan Semiconductor, Inc.*

Renesas Eastern Japan Semiconductor, Inc.*

Orient Semiconductor Electronics Ltd (OSE)

Payton Technology Corp.

Plexus Corp.

Powertech Technology Inc. (PTI)

Shinko Electric Industries Co.

Siliconware Precision Industries Co., Ltd. (SPIL)

United Test and Assembly Center Ltd. (UTAC)

United Test Center Inc. (UTC)

University of Alaska

Walton Advanced Electronics, Ltd.

  3M Company
Compeq Manufacturing Inc.
Hitachi Cable, Ltd.
Hitachi, Ltd.
LG Electronics Inc.
LG Micron Ltd.
Mitsui Mining & Smelting Co., Ltd.
North Corporation
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd.
Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd.
Shinko Electric Industries Co.
Sunright Limited

* denotes a TCC sublicense

 

Most semiconductor material suppliers are licensed under our TCMT license, which requires these licensees to pay us a license fee, but not royalties.

 

9


Table of Contents

Sales and Marketing

 

Our sales activities focus primarily on developing strong, direct relationships at the technical, marketing and executive management levels with leading companies in the semiconductor industry to license our technologies and sell our services. We also sell our engineering services to system manufacturers and government agencies and their contractors. Marketing activities include identifying and promoting application-based technologies for specific, vertical market needs, such as wireless communications or computing, and identifying major business opportunities for current and future product development. Product marketing focuses on identifying the needs and product requirements of our customers. Product marketing also manages the development of all of our technology throughout the development cycle and creates the required marketing materials to assist with the adoption of the technology. Marketing communications focuses on advertising and communications that promote the adoption of our technology.

 

Research and Development

 

We believe that our success depends in part on our ability to achieve the following in a cost-effective and timely manner:

 

    develop new technologies that meet the changing needs of our customers and their markets;

 

    improve our existing technologies to enable growth into new application areas; and

 

    expand our intellectual property portfolio.

 

Our research and development employees work closely with our sales and marketing employees, as well as our customers and partners, to bring new products incorporating our technology to market in a timely, high quality and cost-efficient manner. We also work closely with material and equipment infrastructure providers to identify new technologies and improve existing technologies for use in the assembly and manufacture of semiconductor packages that incorporate our technology.

 

Our service contracts involve research and development for commercial entities and government agencies. For example, some of our development activities for the µZ Fold-Over Stack package technology were partially funded through service contracts with one of our semiconductor company licensees.

 

Our research and development efforts currently focus on two major areas:

 

Chip-scale packaging.    Our CSP efforts focus on developing specific technologies for incorporation of our CSP technology into new applications, developing prototypes and supporting customers or infrastructure providers with improvements to products for existing applications.

 

Multi-chip packaging.    Our multi-chip packaging efforts focus on working with customers to incorporate our technology into their products and applications, developing prototypes and developing new, custom technologies to meet the needs of future applications.

 

We have additional research and development efforts underway in a number of areas related to the miniaturization of electronic products, including areas relating to materials, equipment, packaging, interconnect, assembly and testing of semiconductors and three-dimensional modules.

 

Intellectual Property

 

Our future success and competitive advantage depend upon our continued ability to develop and protect our intellectual property. To protect our intellectual property, we rely on a combination of patents, trade secrets and trademarks. We also attempt to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information through confidentiality agreements with licensees, customers and potential customers and partners, and through proprietary information agreements with employees and consultants.

 

10


Table of Contents

Our patents address advanced single and multi-chip packaging, related processes, and complementary technologies. We have made and continue to make considerable investments in expanding and defending our patent portfolio. See “—Legal Proceedings” for a description of material legal proceedings in which we have recently been involved.

 

As of December 31, 2004, our intellectual property portfolio included 304 issued U.S. patents and 40 issued international patents. In 2004, 58 additional U.S. standard or provisional patent applications were filed, along with 5 additional pending international patent applications. Our patents have expiration dates ranging from January 25, 2009 to May 6, 2022. We continually file new patent applications for new developments in our technology. There are many countries in which we currently have no issued patents; however, products incorporating our technology that are sold in jurisdictions where patents have issued must be licensed, or stem from a licensed source, in order to avoid infringing our intellectual property.

 

Competition

 

As a developer and licensor of semiconductor packaging technology, we compete with other technologies, as opposed to other companies selling products. These competing technologies come principally from the internal design groups of a number of semiconductor and package assembly companies. Many of these companies are licensees, or potential licensees, of ours. In fact, many of our licensees consider packaging research and development to be one of their core competencies.

 

Semiconductor companies that have their own package design and manufacturing capabilities include but are not limited to Texas Instruments Incorporated, and the semiconductor divisions of Fujitsu Microelectronics, Inc., IBM Instruments, Inc., Motorola, Inc., Sharp Corporation and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Among the advanced packaging technologies developed by such companies are flip-chip and chip-on-board technologies that compete with our CSP and multi-chip technologies. Our technologies also compete with technologies developed by the internal design groups of package assembly companies such as Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc., Amkor Technology, Inc. and ChipPAC, Inc.

 

We believe the principal competitive factors in the selection of semiconductor package technology by potential customers are:

 

    proven technology;

 

    cost;

 

    size and circuit board area;

 

    performance;

 

    reliability; and

 

    available infrastructure.

 

We believe that our CSP and multi-chip technologies compete favorably in each of these factors with other advanced packaging technology solutions.

 

Employees

 

As of March 11, 2005, we had 107 employees, with 11 in sales, marketing and licensing, 63 in research and development (including employees who perform engineering, assembly and infrastructure services under our service agreements with third parties) and 33 in finance and administration. We have never had a work stoppage among our employees and no personnel are represented under collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relations with our employees to be good.

 

11


Table of Contents

Available Information

 

Our Internet address is www.tessera.com. There we make available, free of charge, our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Our SEC reports can be accessed through the investor relations section of our Web site. The information found on our Web site is not part of this or any other report we file with or furnish to the SEC.

 

The public may read and copy any materials that we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room located at 450 Fifth Street NW, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains electronic versions of our reports on its website at www.sec.gov.

 

Item 2.    Properties

 

Our principal administrative, sales, marketing and research and development facilities occupy approximately 51,000 square feet in one building in San Jose, California, under a lease that expires on May 31, 2011. We believe our existing facilities are adequate for our current needs.

 

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

 

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. Tessera, Inc., Civ. No. 02-05837 CW (N.D. Cal.)

 

As described below, during the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004, we were involved in a lawsuit with Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd., one of our customers, and its U.S. subsidiaries Samsung Electronics America and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”).

 

On December 16, 2002, Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. initiated a declaratory judgment action against us in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California seeking a declaratory judgment, alleging that: (1) it had not breached the license agreement it entered into with us in 1997 allegedly because its MWBGA, TBGA, FBGA, MCP and laminate based wBGA semiconductor chip packages are not covered by the license agreement and, therefore, it owes us no royalties for such packages; (2) the license agreement remained in effect because it was not in breach for failing to pay royalties for such packages and, therefore, our termination of the license agreement was not effective; (3) its MWBGA, TBGA, FBGA, MCP and laminate based wBGA semiconductor chip packages did not infringe our U.S. Patents Nos. 5,852,326, 5,679,977, 6,433,419 and 6,465,893; and (4) these four Tessera patents were invalid and unenforceable.

 

On February 18, 2003, the Company filed an answer in which the Company denied Samsung’s allegations, including its allegations that any of the Company’s patents were invalid or unenforceable. The Company also filed a counterclaim in which the Company alleged that: (1) Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. had breached the license agreement by, among other things, failing to pay the Company royalties for the use of the Company’s U.S. Patents 5,852,326, 5,679,977, 6,433,419, 6,465,893, 5,950,304 and 6,133,627; (2) the Company’s termination of the 1997 license agreement was effective and the 1997 license agreement was terminated; and (3) Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. and its U.S. subsidiaries Samsung Electronics America and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. had infringed these six Tessera patents.

 

On November 16, 2004, after trial of the parties’ contentions of breach on contract and the underlying patent issues had commenced, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), agreeing to settle the litigation and ending the trial. The court conditionally dismissed the lawsuit on November 17, 2004. Thereafter, on January 26, 2005, the parties executed a definitive Settlement Agreement and a Restated License Agreement, formalizing the MOU. The parties executed a Stipulated Dismissal with Prejudice on February 2, 2005, which the court signed on February 4, 2005, finally dismissing the lawsuit.

 

12


Table of Contents

Tessera, Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc. et a.., Civil Action No. 02-05-CV-94 (E.D. Tex.)

 

On March 1, 2005, the Company filed a lawsuit against Micron Technology, Inc. and its subsidiary Micron Semiconductor Products, Inc. (collectively “Micron”) and against Infineon Technologies AG, Infineon Technologies Richmond LP and Infineon Technologies North America Corp. (collectively “Infineon”) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleging infringement of the Company’s U.S. Patents 5,852,326, 5,679,977, 6,433,419, 6,465,893, and 6,133,627 arising from Micron’s and Infineon’s respective manufacture, use, sale, offer to sell and/or importation of certain packaged semiconductor components and assemblies thereof. We seek to recover damages, up to treble the amount of actual damages, together with attorney’s fees and costs. We also seek to enjoin Micron and Infineon from continuing to infringe these patents.

 

This proceeding has just begun, and the Company cannot predict its outcome. Discovery has not begun, and no trial date has yet been set. An adverse decision in this proceeding could significantly harm our business.

 

Item 4.    Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

 

None.

 

PART II

 

Item 5.    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters

 

Our common stock began trading publicly on the Nasdaq National Market on November 13, 2003 and is traded under the symbol “TSRA.” Prior to that date, there was no public market for our common stock. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sales prices of the common stock during the prior two fiscal years.

 

     High

   Low

Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2003

             

Fourth Quarter (beginning November 13, 2003)

   $ 22.25    $ 16.95
     High

   Low

Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2004

             

First Quarter (ended March 31, 2004)

   $ 22.30    $ 17.00

Second Quarter (ended June 30, 2004)

   $ 19.90    $ 16.41

Third Quarter (ended September 30, 2004)

   $ 24.00    $ 15.77

Fourth Quarter (ended December 31, 2004)

   $ 39.45    $ 22.59

 

As of December 31, 2004, there were outstanding 42,145,267 shares of common stock held by 94 stockholders of record, options to purchase 6,618,040 shares of common stock under our stock option plans and warrants to purchase 46,017 shares of common stock. We have not paid cash dividends on our common stock since our inception and we do not anticipate paying any in the foreseeable future.

 

Initial Public Offering

 

Our initial public offering of 7,500,000 shares of common stock was effected through a Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-108518) that was declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 12, 2003.

 

All of the net proceeds from the initial public offering remain invested in short-term, money market funds pending application of the funds to general corporate purposes, as described in the Registration Statement on Form S-1.

 

13


Table of Contents

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

 

You should read the following selected consolidated financial data in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this annual report.

 

The consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004, December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2002 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report. The consolidated statement of operations data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2002, December 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements that are not included in this annual report. The historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in any future period.

 

     Fiscal Year Ended December 31,

 
     2004

   2003

    2002

    2001

    2000

 
     (in thousands, except per share data)  

Consolidated statement of operations data

                                       

Revenues:

                                       

Intellectual property revenues

   $ 39,624    $ 25,393     $ 17,925     $ 12,258     $ 7,850  

Other intellectual property revenues (1)

     19,998      3,169       5,715       13,291        

Service revenues

     13,114      8,759       4,630       1,466       3,630  
    

  


 


 


 


Total Revenues

     72,736      37,321       28,270       27,015       11,480  
    

  


 


 


 


Operating expenses:

                                       

Cost of revenues

     9,613      6,734       4,264       5,298       7,003  

Research and development

     7,107      7,661       6,700       8,202       9,418  

Selling, general and administrative

     20,144      11,030       7,552       20,761       17,342  

Stock-based compensation

     231      1,110       1,942       1,364       13,276  
    

  


 


 


 


Total operating expenses

     37,095      26,535       20,458       35,625       47,039  
    

  


 


 


 


Operating income (loss)

     35,641      10,786       7,812       (8,610 )     (35,559 )

Interest and other income, net

     828      195       45       409       1,300  
    

  


 


 


 


Income (loss) before taxes

     36,469      10,981       7,857       (8,201 )     (34,259 )

Benefit (provision) for income taxes

     22,594      (1,626 )     (1,318 )            

Discontinued operations

                            179  
    

  


 


 


 


Net income (loss)

   $ 59,063    $ 9,355     $ 6,539     $ (8,201 )   $ (34,080 )
    

  


 


 


 


Cumulative preferred stock dividends in arrears (2)

   $    $ (6,187 )   $ (12,941 )   $ (11,764 )   $ (10,347 )

Deemed preferred stock dividend

                                    (1,284 )
    

  


 


 


 


Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders

   $ 59,063    $ 3,168     $ (6,402 )   $ (19,965 )   $ (45,711 )
    

  


 


 


 


Net income (loss) per common share; basic

   $ 1.47    $ 0.28     $ (0.94 )   $ (3.18 )   $ (8.45 )
    

  


 


 


 


Net income (loss) per common share; diluted

   $ 1.27    $ 0.22     $ (0.94 )   $ (3.18 )   $ (8.45 )
    

  


 


 


 


Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, basic (3)

     40,077      11,141       6,784       6,282       5,411  
    

  


 


 


 


Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, diluted (3)

     46,622      41,653       6,784       6,282       5,411  
    

  


 


 


 



(1) Other intellectual property revenues consist of a portion of the payments received through license negotiations or the resolution of patent disputes, insofar as such payments include amounts for royalties related to previous periods.

 

14


Table of Contents
(2) All outstanding shares of preferred stock were converted into shares of common stock in connection with our initial public offering.
(3) See note 2 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this annual report for an explanation of the methods used to determine the number of shares used to compute per share amounts.

 

     Fiscal Year Ended December 31,

 
     2004

    2003

    2002

    2001

    2000

 
     (in thousands)  

Consolidated balance sheet data:

                                        

Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments

   $ 108,339     $ 64,379     $ 20,170     $ 1,577     $ 23,510  

Total assets

     139,682       70,081       24,170       24,583       29,643  

Redeemable convertible preferred stock

                 96,000       96,000       96,000  

Deferred stock-based compensation

     (414 )     (153 )     (620 )     (2,477 )     (13,393 )

Total stockholders’ (deficit) equity

     134,976       65,989       (74,492 )     (83,764 )     (77,146 )

 

Item 7.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

Overview

 

We develop semiconductor packaging technology that meets the demand for miniaturization and increased performance of electronic products. We license our technology to our customers, enabling them to produce semiconductors that are smaller and faster, and incorporate more features. These semiconductors are utilized in a broad range of communications, computing and consumer electronics products. In addition, by utilizing our technology, we believe that our customers are also able to reduce the time-to-market and development costs of their semiconductors.

 

From our inception in 1990 through 1995, we engaged principally in research and development activities related to chip-scale and multi-chip packaging technology. We began generating revenues from licenses of our intellectual property in 1994. We began manufacturing activities in 1997 to support market acceptance of our technology. We discontinued most of these manufacturing activities in 1999, after many suppliers had developed the manufacturing infrastructure to implement our technology. We continue to develop prototypes and manufacture limited volumes of select products.

 

We generate revenues from two primary sources:

 

    intellectual property, which represents the majority of our revenues and consists of license fees for our patented technologies and royalties on semiconductors shipped by our licensees that employ these patented technologies; and

 

    services, which utilize or further our intellectual property.

 

Licensees pay a non-refundable license fee. Revenues from license fees are generally recognized once the license agreement has been executed by both parties. In some instances, we provide training to our licensees under the terms of the license agreement. The amount of training provided is limited and is incidental to the licensed technology. Accordingly, in instances where training is provided under the terms of a license agreement, a portion of the license fee is deferred until the training has been provided. The amount of revenue deferred is based on the price we charge for similar services when they are sold separately.

 

Semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers pay on-going royalties on their shipment of semiconductors incorporating our intellectual property. Royalty payments are primarily based upon the number of electrical connections to the semiconductor chip in a package covered by our technology, although we do have arrangements in which royalties are paid based upon a percent of the net sales price. Our licensees report royalties quarterly, and most also pay on a quarterly basis. As there is no reliable basis on which to estimate our royalty revenues prior to obtaining these reports from our licensees, we recognize royalty revenue when we

 

15


Table of Contents

receive a royalty report from our customer. We receive these reports the quarter after the semiconductors that incorporate our technology have been shipped.

 

From time to time, we receive payments through license negotiations or the resolution of patent disputes. These settlements generally include amounts for royalties related to previous periods based on historical production volumes. These amounts are reported as “other intellectual property revenues” in the statement of operations. Other intellectual property revenue will vary significantly on a quarterly basis.

 

Service revenues are primarily derived from engineering services, including related training services. Revenues from services related to training are recognized as the services are performed. Revenues from other services are recognized on a percentage-of-completion or completed contract method of accounting depending on the nature of the project. Under the percentage-of-completion method, revenues recognized are that portion of the total contract price equal to the ratio of costs expended to date to the anticipated final total costs based on current estimates of the costs to complete the projects. If the total estimated costs to complete a project were to exceed the total contract amount, indicating a loss, the entire anticipated loss would be recognized immediately. Revenues under the completed contract method are recognized upon acceptance by the customer or in accordance with the contract specifications.

 

We derive a significant portion of our revenues from licensees headquartered outside of the United States, principally in Asia, and these revenues accounted for 42.7% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004. We expect that these revenues will continue to account for a significant portion of revenues in future periods. All of our revenues are denominated in U.S. dollars. For the year ended December 31, 2004, Intel Corporation and Texas Instruments each accounted for over 10% of total revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2003, Texas Instruments accounted for over 10% of total revenues.

 

We license most of our CSP and multi-chip packaging technology under a license that we refer to as a Tessera Compliant Chip, or TCC, license. The TCC license grants a worldwide right under the licensed patent claims to assemble, use and sell certain CSPs and multi-chip packages. We generally license semiconductor material suppliers under our Tessera Compliant Mounting Tape, or TCMT, license. The TCMT license calls for a one-time license fee and, unlike most of our other licenses, does not require ongoing royalty payments.

 

Cost of revenues consists primarily of direct compensation, materials, supplies and equipment depreciation costs. Cost of revenues primarily relates to service revenues as the cost of revenues associated with intellectual property revenues is de minimis. Consequently, cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenues will vary based on the percentage of our revenues that is attributable to service revenues.

 

Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for personnel as well as costs related to patent applications and examinations, materials, supplies and equipment depreciation. Our research and development is conducted primarily in-house and targets both CSP and multi-chip technology. All research and development costs are expensed as incurred. We believe that a significant level of research and development expenses will be required for us to remain competitive in the future. We have increased research and development personnel to 59 at December 31, 2004 from 53 at December 31, 2003, and expect to continue to increase research and development personnel in the future.

 

Selling expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for sales and marketing personnel, marketing programs, public relations, promotional materials, travel and related trade show expenses. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for: general management, information technology, finance and accounting personnel; litigation expenses and related fees; facilities costs; and professional services. Our general and administrative expenses are not allocated to other expense line items. We anticipate that our selling, general and administrative expenses will increase as a result of our efforts to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, related regulations and ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. Excluding litigation expenses, we expect that as a percentage of revenues,

 

16


Table of Contents

these expenses will decrease over time. However, we expect that litigation expenses will continue to be a material portion of our general and administrative expenses in future periods, and may increase significantly in some periods, because of our litigation with Samsung, described above in “Legal Proceedings”, and because we expect that we will become involved in other litigation from time to time in the future in order to enforce and protect our intellectual property rights.

 

In connection with the grant of stock options from 1996 through 2004, we recorded an aggregate of $30.3 million in deferred stock-based compensation within stockholders’ equity, due to the difference between the exercise price and the estimated fair value of common stock on the date of grant. The compensation expense is amortized over the vesting period of generally four years. As of December 31, 2004, we had an aggregate of $414,000 of deferred stock-based compensation remaining to be amortized through 2008.

 

Results of Operations

 

The following table presents our historical operating results for the periods indicated as a percentage of revenues:

 

     Fiscal Year Ended December 31,

 
         2004    

        2003    

        2002    

 

Revenues:

                  

Intellectual property revenues

   54.5 %   68.0 %   63.4 %

Other intellectual property revenues

   27.5     8.5     20.2  

Service revenues

   18.0     23.5     16.4  
    

 

 

Total Revenues

   100.0     100.0     100.0  
    

 

 

Operating expenses:

                  

Cost of revenues

   13.2     18.0     15.1  

Research and development

   9.8     20.5     23.7  

Selling, general and administrative

   27.7     29.6     26.7  

Stock-based compensation

   0.3     3.0     6.9  
    

 

 

Total operating expenses

   51.0     71.1     72.4  
    

 

 

Operating income (loss)

   49.0     28.9     27.6  

Interest and other income, net

   1.1     0.5     0.2  
    

 

 

Income before taxes

   50.1     29.4     27.8  

Benefit (provision) for income taxes

   31.1     (4.4 )   (4.7 )
    

 

 

Net income

   81.2 %   25.0 %   23.1 %
    

 

 

 

Fiscal Year 2004 and 2003

 

Revenues.    Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $72.7 million compared with $37.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, an increase of $35.4 million, or 94.9%. The $35.4 million increase was primarily due to a $14.2 million increase in intellectual property revenues, a $16.8 million increase in other intellectual property revenues and a $4.4 million increase in service revenues.

 

Intellectual property revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $39.6 million as compared to $25.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase of $14.2 million or 56.0% consisted of $5.8 million from new customers and $8.4 million from existing customers. The increases are attributable to the signing of five new licensees and an increase in royalties reported by existing customers.

 

Other intellectual property revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $20.0 million as compared to $3.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. This increase of $16.8 million or 531.1% was primarily

 

17


Table of Contents

due to resolutions of negotiations with NEC Electronics Corporation, OKI Electronic Industry Co. Ltd. and United Test and Assembly Center Ltd., totaling $4.8 million and $15.2 million from existing customers, which includes the $6.0 million payment received from Samsung Electronics for royalties relating to past production. These resolutions were greater than the aggregate amount negotiated with five customers in the year ended December 31, 2003 which totaled to approximately $3.2 million.

 

Service revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $13.1 million as compared to $8.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, an increase of $4.3 million or 48.9%. This increase is directly related to the increase in number of government contracts. For the year ended December 31, 2004, revenues from government contracts increased by $4.6 million or 60.1% over the year ended December 31, 2003. Revenues from government contracts for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 totaled $12.2 million and $7.6 million, respectively.

 

Cost of Revenues.    Cost of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2004 increased to $9.6 million, or 13.2% of revenues, from $6.7 million, or 18.0% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2003 primarily due to increased costs associated with an increase in service revenues. Cost of revenues primarily relates to service revenues as the cost of revenues associated with intellectual property revenues is de minimis. For the year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 cost of revenues represented 73.3% and 76.9% respectively, of service revenues for each associated year. Cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenues will vary based on the service revenues component of total revenues. The majority of this increase in the year of 2004 was attributable to the allocation of more personnel to service-related projects and an increase in the number of these projects. Increased materials and subcontractor costs related to service-related projects also accounted for part of the increase in cost of revenues.

 

Research and Development.    Research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004 decreased to $7.1 million, or 9.8% of revenues, from $7.7 million, or 20.5% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2003. This decrease of $554,000 in expenses is primarily due to the reassignment of more personnel resources to service revenues projects.

 

Selling, General and Administrative.    Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2004 increased to $20.1 million, or 27.7% of revenues, from $11.0 million, or 29.6% of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase is attributable to the costs of being a public company and our litigation with Samsung, described above in “Legal Proceedings.” The increased costs related to being a public company are primarily salaries, professional fees and insurance. For the year ended December 31, 2004 these costs were $3.2 million, which included $550,000 of professional charges for the Company’s secondary public offering that closed on March 31, 2004. Total litigation expenses were $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. We expect to continue to incur litigation expenses in upcoming quarters. The addition of personnel and personnel-related expenses for the expansion of sales and marketing efforts also contributed to the increase in selling, general and administrative expenses.

 

Stock-based Compensation.    Stock-based compensation decreased to $231,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. The decrease is due to lower amortization of deferred compensation related to issuance of stock options in 1998 through 2000.

 

Interest and Other Income, Net.    Interest and other income, net was $828,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004, compared to $195,000 for the year ended December 31, 2003. The increase is directly related to income earned on higher cash balances as a result of the proceeds from the Company’s initial public offering in November 2003 and positive cash flow generated from operations.

 

Benefit and Provision for Income Taxes.    For the year ended December 31, 2004, we recorded a provision benefit of $22.6 million consisting of $343,000 of Alternative Minimum Tax (“AMT”), $1.7 million of foreign withholding taxes off-set-by a benefit for the recognition of deferred tax assets of $24.7 million. The $24.7 million benefit is due to the reversal of the valuation allowance against our net operating loss, (“NOL”). Due to

 

18


Table of Contents

historic and current income, prospects of future book income and the resolution of the Samsung litigation, management determined that a valuation allowance was no longer necessary, as it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be fully realized. For the year ended December 31, 2003, the provision of $1.6 million consisted of $213,000 of AMT and $1.4 million of foreign withholding taxes. Foreign withholding taxes paid, relate to statutory withholding taxes on license and royalty revenues earned in Japan, Korea and Singapore. We paid no federal or state income taxes in the year ended December 31, 2004 primarily due to our operating NOL and allowable stock option deductions related to gains that our employees realized on the exercise and sale of their stock options. In the year ended December 31, 2003, we paid no state income taxes.

 

Fiscal Year 2003 and 2002

 

Revenues.    Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003 were $37.3 million compared with $28.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002, an increase of $9.1 million, or 32.0%. The $9.1 million increase was primarily due to a $7.5 million increase in intellectual property revenues and a $4.1 million increase in service revenues, partially offset by a $2.5 million decrease in other intellectual property revenues. The increase in intellectual property revenues was principally due to a $3.5 million increase in revenues from existing licensees and a $3.9 million increase in revenues from signing of new licensees. The increase in revenues from existing licensees was primarily due to increased sales by our licensees of semiconductors that incorporate our technology, resulting in increased royalty payments. The increase in revenues from new licensees is primarily due to royalty payments. The increase in service revenues is due to service contracts entered into with new customers in late 2002 and early 2003. Other intellectual property revenues declined by $2.5 million primarily because the amounts we received upon our litigation settlement with Sharp Corporation in 2002, totaling $4.0 million, and upon resolution of negotiations with Hitachi, Rohm, Samsung and Toshiba, totaling $1.7 million, were greater than the aggregate amounts we received upon resolution of negotiations with Intel, Mitsubishi, Sanyo, Seiko Epson and Shinko in 2003, which totaled approximately $3.2 million.

 

Cost of Revenues.    Cost of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $6.7 million, or 18.0% of revenues, from $4.3 million, or 15.1% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002 primarily due to increased costs associated with an increase in service revenues. Cost of revenues primarily relates to service revenues as the cost of revenues associated with intellectual property revenues is de minimis. Cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenue will vary based on the service revenues component of total revenues. The majority of this increase in the year of 2003 was attributable to the allocation of more personnel to service-related projects and an increase in the number of these projects. Increased materials and subcontractor costs related to service-related projects also accounted for part of the increase in cost of revenues.

 

Research and Development.    Research and development expenses for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $7.7 million, or 20.5% of revenues from $6.7 million, or 23.7% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002. This increase in expenses was primarily due to the addition of personnel, which increased to 53 people as of December 31, 2003 as compared to 46 as of December 31, 2002 and personnel-related costs to accommodate our expanding research and development activities.

 

Selling, General and Administrative.    Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2003 increased to $11.0 million, or 29.6% of revenues, from $7.6 million, or 26.7% of revenues, for the year ended December 31, 2002. The increase is attributable to our ongoing litigation with Samsung. Total litigation expenses were $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 as compared to $25,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. We expect to continue to incur litigation expenses related to the Samsung legal proceeding in upcoming quarters. The addition of personnel and personnel-related expenses for the expansion of sales and marketing efforts also contributed to the increase in selling, general and administrative expenses.

 

Stock-based Compensation.    Stock-based compensation decreased to $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 as compared to $1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. The decrease is due to lower amortization of deferred compensation related to issuance of stock options in 1998 through 2000.

 

19


Table of Contents

Interest and Other Income, Net.    Interest and other income, net was $195,000 for the year ended December 31, 2003, compared to $45,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. The increase was due to a one-time charge for a foreign translation loss of $237,000 in 2002.

 

Provision for Income Taxes.    Provision for income taxes increased to $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 from $1.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. For the year ended December 31, 2003, the provision consisted of $213,000 of federal alternative minimum tax, or AMT, and $1.4 million of foreign withholding taxes. For the year ended December 31, 2002, the total provision of $1.3 million related to foreign withholding taxes. Foreign withholding taxes paid relate to statutory withholding taxes on license and royalty revenues earned in Japan and Korea. We paid no state income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2003 and no federal or state income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2002.

 

20


Table of Contents

Quarterly Results of Operations

 

The following table presents our unaudited quarterly results of operations for the eight quarters in the period ended December 31, 2004. You should read the following table in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes contained elsewhere in this annual report. We have prepared the unaudited information on the same basis as our audited consolidated financial statements. This table includes all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, that we consider necessary for fair presentation of our financial position and operating results for the quarters presented. Operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results for any future quarters or for a full year.

 

    Three Months Ended

    Mar 31,
2003


    Jun 30,
2003


    Sep 30,
2003


    Dec 31,
2003


    Mar 31,
2004


    Jun 30,
2004


    Sep 30,
2004


    Dec 31,
2004


    (in thousands, except per share data)

Revenues:

                                                             

Intellectual property revenues

  $ 6,547     $ 5,503     $ 5,987     $ 7,356     $ 8,896     $ 8,136     $ 10,399     $ 12,193

Other intellectual property revenues

    462       414       1,293       1,000       1,974       6,606       9,350       2,068

Service revenues

    2,248       2,266       1,924       2,321       2,251       2,904       3,896       4,063
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Total Revenues

    9,257       8,183       9,204       10,677       13,121       17,646       23,645       18,324
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Operating expenses:

                                                             

Cost of revenues

    1,385       1,657       1,849       1,843       1,850       2,037       2,610       3,116

Research and development

    1,793       1,911       1,997       1,960       2,221       1,855       1,490       1,541

Selling, general and administrative

    2,198       2,688       2,839       3,305       4,212       4,667       4,954       6,311

Stock-based compensation

    233       163       612       102       125       61       20       25
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Total operating expenses

    5,609       6,419       7,297       7,210       8,408       8,620       9,074       10,993
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Operating income

    3,648       1,764       1,907       3,467       4,713       9,026       14,571       7,331

Interest and other income (expense), net

    81       52       69       (7 )     109       133       233       353
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Income before taxes

    3,729       1,816       1,976       3,460       4,822       9,159       14,804       7,684

Benefit (provision) for income taxes

    (520 )     (371 )     (370 )     (365 )     (723 )     (497 )     (999 )     24,813
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Net income

    3,209       1,445       1,606       3,095       4,099       8,662       13,805       32,497

Cumulative preferred stock dividends in arrears

    (2,742 )     (3,445 )                                  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders

  $ 467     $ (2,000 )   $ 1,606     $ 3,095     $ 4,099     $ 8,662     $ 13,805     $ 32,497
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Net income (loss) per common share; basic

  $ 0.07     $ (0.29 )   $ 0.23     $ 0.13     $ 0.11     $ 0.22     $ 0.34     $ 0.78
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Net income (loss) per common share; diluted

  $ 0.06     $ (0.29 )   $ 0.04     $ 0.07     $ 0.09     $ 0.19     $ 0.30     $ 0.69
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, basic

    6,872       6,828       6,870       23,539       38,465       39,446       40,448       41,657
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, diluted

    8,353       6,828       40,869       44,711       45,904       46,472       46,655       47,229
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

 

21


Table of Contents

The following table presents our historical results for the periods indicated as percentage of revenues, except per share data.

 

    Three Months Ended

 
    Mar 31,
2003


    Jun 30,
2003


    Sep 30,
2003


    Dec 31,
2003


    Mar 31,
2004


    Jun 30,
2004


    Sep 30,
2004


    Dec 31,
2004


 

Revenues:

                                                               

Intellectual property revenues

    70.7 %     67.2 %     65.0 %     68.9 %     67.8 %     46.1 %     44.0 %     66.5 %

Other intellectual property revenues

    5.0       5.1       14.0       9.4       15.0       37.4       39.5       11.3  

Service revenues

    24.3       27.7       21.0       21.7       17.2       16.5       16.5       22.2  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Total Revenues

    100.0       100.0       100.0       100.0       100.0       100.0       100.0       100.0  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Operating expenses:

                                                               

Cost of revenues

    15.0       20.2       20.1       17.3       14.1       11.5       11.0       17.0  

Research and development

    19.4       23.4       21.7       18.4       16.9       10.5       6.3       8.4  

Selling, general and administrative

    23.7       32.8       30.8       30.9       32.1       26.4       21.0       34.4  

Stock-based compensation

    2.5       2.0       6.6       0.9       1.0       0.3       0.1       0.1  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Total operating expenses

    60.6       78.4       79.2       67.5       64.1       48.7       38.4       59.9  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Operating income

    39.4       21.6       20.8       32.5       35.9       51.3       61.6       40.1  

Interest and other income (expense), net

    0.9       0.6       0.7       (0.1 )     0.8       0.8       1.0       1.9  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Income before taxes

    40.3       22.2       21.5       32.4       36.7       52.1       62.6       42.0  

Benefit (provision) for income taxes

    (5.6 )     (4.5 )     (4.0 )     (3.4 )     (5.5 )     (2.8 )     (4.2 )     135.4  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Net income

    34.7       17.7       17.5       29.0       31.2       49.3       58.4       177.4  

Cumulative preferred stock dividends in arrears

    (29.6 )     (42.1 )                                    
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders

    5.0 %     (24.4 )%     17.5 %     29.0 %     31.2 %     49.3 %     58.4 %     177.4 %
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Net income (loss) per common share; basic

  $ 0.07     $ (0.29 )   $ 0.23     $ 0.13     $ 0.11     $ 0.22     $ 0.34     $ 0.78  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Net income (loss) per common share; diluted

  $ 0.06     $ (0.29 )   $ 0.04     $ 0.07     $ 0.09     $ 0.19     $ 0.30     $ 0.69  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, basic

    6,872       6,828       6,870       23,539       38,465       39,446       40,448       41,657  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Weighted average number of shares used in per share calculation, diluted

    8,353       6,828       40,869       44,711       45,904       46,472       46,655       47,229  
   


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Our intellectual property revenues grew sequentially in each quarter of 2004 and 2003, due to an increase in revenues from both existing licensees and the signing of new licensees with the exception of the quarters ending June 30, 2004 and June 30, 2003. Our intellectual property revenues declined in the quarter ended June 30, 2004

 

22


Table of Contents

due to a slight decrease in royalty revenue from the prior quarter. The decline in June 30, 2003 was due to the timing of our signing of new licensees in the prior quarter.

 

Other intellectual property revenues have been significantly impacted by revenues related to the resolution of license negotiations and patent disputes, particularly in the quarters ended June 30, 2004 and September 30, 2004, due to our resolution of negotiations with NEC Electronics Corporation and the $6.0 million payment from Samsung Electronics, respectively.

 

Cost of revenues has generally increased throughout 2004 and 2003 consistent with overall growth in service revenues. Our costs of revenues primarily relate to service revenues.

 

Operating expenses generally increased throughout 2004 and 2003 due to the costs of being a public company and litigation expenses related to the Samsung case, described above in “Legal Proceedings.” If litigation expenses are excluded, operating expenses have generally increased in 2004 and 2003 to support our efforts to comply with evolving laws and regulations regarding corporate governance and the growth in revenues.

 

Net Operating Losses and Tax Credit Carryforwards

 

As of December 31, 2004, we had federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $ 88.0 million and state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $50.1 million. Approximately $44.7 million of the federal and state net operating loss carryforwards related to stock option deductions. The difference between the federal and state net operating loss carryforwards is attributable to the capitalization of research and development costs for state purposes. These operating loss carryforwards began to expire on various dates beginning in 2002, and will continue to expire through 2022. Under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, substantial changes in our ownership may limit the amount of net operating loss carryforwards that can be utilized annually in the future to offset taxable income.

 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

Since our inception, we have financed our operations primarily through sales of equity securities and, more recently, through cash generated from operations. We have received a total of $93.7 million from private offerings of our equity securities and we generated $34.6 million of net proceeds from our initial public offering in November 2003. At December 31, 2004 we had $108.3 million in cash and cash equivalents.

 

Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $36.1 million compared to $11.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Operating cash flows in 2004 were generated from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $1.3 million and increases in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $108,000 and $601,000, respectively, and a decrease in deferred revenue of $95,000. This was partially off-set by an increase in accounts receivable of $723,000 and other assets of $24.2 million. The increase in other assets was directly related to recording of our deferred tax assets of $24.7 million. Operating cash flows in 2003 were generated from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $2.1 million and increases in accounts payable, accrued liabilities and deferred revenue of $226,000, $1.0 million and $202,000, respectively. This was partially off-set by increases in accounts receivable and other assets of $657,000 and $540,000, respectively. The increase in accrued liabilities is directly related to increased litigation expenses related to the Samsung case, described above in “Legal Proceedings.”

 

Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $11.7 million compared to $18.8 million in the comparable period in 2002. Operating cash flows in 2003 were generated from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $2.1 million and increases in accounts payable, accrued liabilities and deferred revenue of $226,000, $1.0 million and $202,000, respectively. This was partially off-set by increases in accounts receivable and other assets of $657,000 and $540,000, respectively. The increase in accrued liabilities is directly related to increased litigation expenses related to the Samsung case, described above in

 

23


Table of Contents

“Legal Proceedings.” Net cash generated by operating activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was generated primarily from net income adjusted for non-cash expenses of $3.1 million and a decrease in accounts receivable of $18.8 million. This was partially offset by decreases in accrued liabilities of $7.1 million and deferred revenue of $1.8 million. The decrease in accounts receivable was primarily due to the collection of a receivable related to a legal settlement with Texas Instruments late in 2001. The decrease in accrued liabilities was primarily due to payment of litigation costs.

 

Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $1.8 million consisting of $1.8 million of property and equipment purchases, off-set by $7,000 of proceeds from the sale of fixed assets. Net cash provided by investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2003 was $17.4 million, due to the sales of short-term marketable securities. Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2002 was $18.3 million, primarily due to net purchases of short-term marketable securities, and was primarily funded by cash from operations.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2004, net cash flows provided by financing activities were directly related to net proceeds from exercise of stock options and warrants and from the proceeds of our employee stock purchase program. Net cash provided by financing activities for year ended December 31, 2003 was $33.9 million comprised primarily of net proceeds of $34.6 million from the Company’s initial public offering. Net cash provided by financing activities for the comparable period in 2002 was $295,000 representing $567,000 in proceeds from the exercise of stock options off-set partially by repayment of capital lease obligations.

 

We believe that based on current levels of operations and anticipated growth, our cash from operations, together with cash currently available, will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next twelve months. Poor financial results, unanticipated expenses, unanticipated acquisitions of technologies or businesses or unanticipated strategic investments could give rise to additional financing requirements sooner than we expect. There can be no assurance that equity or debt financing will be available when needed or, if available, that the financing will be on terms satisfactory to us and not dilutive to our then-current stockholders.

 

Contractual Cash Obligations

 

As of December 31, 2004 the following sets forth our minimum commitments under operating leases:

 

Year Ended December 31,


   Amount

     (in thousands)

2005

     379

2006

     377

2007

     368

2008

     368

2009

     368

Thereafter

     521
    

Total minimum lease commitments

   $ 2,381
    

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. By their nature, these estimates and judgments are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. On an ongoing basis we re-evaluate our judgments and estimates including those related to long-lived assets, income taxes, litigation and contingencies. We base our estimates and judgments on our historical experience, knowledge of current conditions and our beliefs of what could occur in the future considering available information. Actual results could differ from those

 

24


Table of Contents

estimates, and material effects on our operating results and financial position may result. Our estimates are guided by observing the following critical accounting policies:

 

Revenue Recognition.    We recognize revenues in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements, as amended by SAB 104. SAB 104 requires that four basic criteria must be met before revenues can be recognized: (1) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (2) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; (3) the fee is fixed and determinable; and (4) collectibility is reasonably assured.

 

In order to determine whether collection is probable, we assess a number of factors, including past transaction history with the customer and the credit-worthiness of the customer. If we determine that collection is not reasonably assured, we defer the recognition of revenue at the time until collection becomes reasonably assured, which is generally upon receipt of payment.

 

Estimating accrued liabilities.    We review our accounts payable and accrued liabilities at each reporting period, and accrue liabilities as appropriate. During this analysis we consider items such as research and development activity, commitments made to or the level of activity with vendors, payroll and employee-related costs, historic spending, budgeted spending and anticipated changes in the costs of services.

 

Valuation of Long Lived Assets.    We evaluate the recoverability of our long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset might not be recoverable, in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144 (“SFAS 144”). Impairment evaluations involve management estimates of assets’ useful lives and future cash flows. When such an event occurs, we estimate the future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition. If the undiscounted expected future cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment loss is recognized. Actual useful lives and cash flows could be different from those estimated by our management. This could have a material effect on our operating results and financial position. To date, no impairment loss has been recognized. We assess the impairment in value to our long-lived assets whenever events or circumstances indicate that their carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors we consider important that could trigger an impairment review include the following:

 

    operating losses;

 

    significant negative industry trends;

 

    significant underutilization of the assets; and

 

    significant changes in how we use the assets or our plans for their use.

 

Stock-based compensation.    Our Amended and Restated 2003 Equity Incentive Plan is accounted for in accordance with Accounting Principles Board No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (“APB 25”), and complies with the disclosure provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (“SFAS 123”), and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, Transition and Disclosure” (“SFAS 148”). Expense associated with stock-based compensation is amortized on an accelerated basis over the vesting period of the individual award consistent with the method described in Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 28, “Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans an interpretation of APB Opinions No. 15 and 25” (“FIN 28”).

 

We account for stock issued to non-employees in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123 and Emerging Issues Task Force Consensus No. 96-18, “Accounting for Equity Instruments That are Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services” (“EITF 96-18”). Under SFAS 123 and EITF 96-18, stock option awards issued to non-employees are accounted for at fair value using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. We believe that the fair value of the stock options are more reliably

 

25


Table of Contents

measured than the fair value of the services received. The fair value of each non-employee stock award is remeasured at each period end until a commitment date is reached, which is generally the vesting date.

 

Accounting for Income Taxes.    We account for income taxes under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based upon the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and income. The tax consequences of most events recognized in the current year’s financial statements are included in determining income taxes currently payable. However, because tax laws and financial accounting standards differ in their recognition and measurement of assets, liabilities, equity, revenues, expenses, gains and losses, differences arise between the amount of taxable income and pretax financial income for a year and between the tax bases of assets or liabilities and their reported amounts in the financial statements. Because it is assumed that the reported amounts of assets and liabilities will be recovered and settled, respectively, a difference between the tax basis of an asset or a liability and its reported amount in the balance sheet will result in a taxable or a deductible amount in some future years when the related liabilities are settled or the reported amounts of assets are recovered, hence giving rise to a deferred tax asset. We must then assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income and to the extent we believe that recovery is not likely, we must establish a valuation allowance.

 

At December 31, 2003, we had deferred tax assets of $26.8 million which were fully reserved with a tax valuation allowance. During 2004, the deferred tax assets increased by approximately $16.0 million to $42.9 million. Additionally during 2004, management determined that it is more likely than not that certain future tax benefits will be realized as a result of historic and current income, prospects of future book income and the resolution of the Samsung litigation. Accordingly, we reduced the tax valuation allowance by $24.7 million to reflect the anticipated utilization of the deferred tax assets. The remaining deferred tax valuation allowance of $18.2 million relates to deferred tax assets from federal and state net operating losses resulting from stock option deductions. When recognized, the tax benefit from the loss carryforwards will be accounted for as a credit to additional paid in capital.

 

Litigation and Contingencies.    From time to time, we have been subject to legal proceedings and claims with respect to such matters as patents and other actions arising out of the normal course of business, as well as other matters identified in “Legal Proceedings.”

 

The results of any litigation are inherently uncertain, and any adverse decision could result in a loss of our proprietary rights, subject us to significant liabilities, require us to seek licenses from others, limit the value of our technologies and otherwise negatively impact over business. If we believe that it is probable for a certain proceeding to result in an adverse decision and that the loss is estimable, we would establish an appropriate accrual for the loss.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Statement No. 123R (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“Statement 123R”), which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” Statement 123R supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, and amends FASB Statement No. 95, “Statement of Cash Flows.” Generally, the approach in Statement 123R is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123R requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure will no longer be an alternative. The new standard will be effective for the Company in the quarter ending December 31, 2005. The Company is in the process of assessing the impact of adopting this new standard.

 

26


Table of Contents

Risk Factors

 

A court invalidation or limitation of our key patents could significantly harm our business.

 

Our patent portfolio contains some patents that are particularly significant to our ongoing revenues and business. If any of these key patents are invalidated, or if a court limits the scope of the claims in any of these key patents, the likelihood that companies will take new licenses and that current licensees will continue to agree to pay under their existing licenses could be significantly reduced. The resulting loss in license fees and royalties could significantly harm our business.

 

We may become involved in litigation with our licensees, potential licensees or strategic partners, which could harm our business.

 

We may become involved in a dispute relating to our intellectual property or our contracts, which could include or be with a licensee, potential licensee or strategic partner. Our former lawsuit with Samsung (a licensee) and our current lawsuit with Infineon and Micron (potential licensees), as described above in “Legal Proceedings”, are examples. Any such dispute could cause the licensee or strategic partner to cease making royalty or other payments to us and could substantially damage our relationship with the company on both business and technical levels. Any litigation stemming from such a dispute could be very expensive and may cause us to cease being profitable. Litigation could also severely disrupt or shut down the business operations of our licensees or strategic partners, which in turn would significantly harm our ongoing relations with them and cause us to lose royalty revenues. Any such litigation could also harm our relationships with other licensees or our ability to gain new customers, who may postpone licensing decisions pending the outcome of the litigation.

 

In addition, many semiconductor and package assembly companies maintain their own internal design groups and have their own package design and manufacturing capabilities. If we believe these groups have designed technologies that infringe upon our intellectual property, and if they fail to enter into a license agreement with us or pay for licensed technology, then we may be forced to commence legal proceedings against them.

 

If we fail to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights, our business will suffer.

 

We rely primarily on a combination of license, development and nondisclosure agreements and other contractual provisions and patent, trademark, trade secret and copyright law to protect our intellectual property rights. If we fail to protect our intellectual property rights, our licensees and others may seek to use our technology without the payment of license fees and royalties, which could weaken our competitive position, reduce our operating results and increase the likelihood of costly litigation. The growth of our business depends in large part on our ability to convince third parties of the applicability of our intellectual property to their products, and our ability to enforce our intellectual property rights against them.

 

In certain instances, we attempt to obtain patent protection for portions of our intellectual property portfolio, and our license agreements typically include both issued patents and pending patent applications. If we fail to obtain patents or if the patents issued to us do not cover all of the claims we asserted in our patent applications, others could use portions of our intellectual property without the payment of license fees and royalties. We also rely on trade secret law rather than patent law to protect other portions of our proprietary technology. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, through confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants and customers. We cannot be certain that these contracts have not been and will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach or that our trade secrets will not otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. If we fail to use these mechanisms to protect our intellectual property, or if a court fails to enforce our contractual provisions with respect to these rights, our business will suffer. We cannot be certain that these protection mechanisms can be successfully asserted in the future or will not be invalidated or challenged.

 

27


Table of Contents

We may not be able to protect our confidential information, and this could adversely affect our business.

 

We generally enter into contractual relationships with our employees that protect our confidential information. The misappropriation of our trade secrets or other proprietary information could seriously harm our business. In addition, we may not be able to timely detect unauthorized use or transfer of our intellectual property and take appropriate steps to enforce our rights. In the event we are unable to enforce these contractual obligations and our intellectual property rights, our business could be adversely affected.

 

We may be required to undertake costly legal proceedings to enforce or protect our intellectual property rights and this may harm our business.

 

In the past we have found it necessary to litigate to enforce our patents and other intellectual property rights, to protect our trade secrets, to determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others or to defend against claims of infringement or invalidity. We currently are involved in litigation with Micron and Infineon regarding our intellectual property rights, as described above in “Legal Proceedings”, and we expect to be involved in similar litigation in the future. Litigation is inherently uncertain and any adverse decision could result in a loss of our proprietary rights, subject us to significant liabilities, require us to seek licenses from others, limit the value of our licensed technology and otherwise negatively impact our business. Whether or not determined in our favor or settled by us, litigation is costly and diverts our managerial, technical, legal and financial resources from our business operations.

 

Our revenues may suffer if we cannot continue to license or enforce our intellectual property rights or if third parties assert that we violate their intellectual property rights.

 

We rely upon patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws in the United States and similar laws in other countries, and agreements with our employees, customers, suppliers and other parties, to establish and maintain our intellectual property rights in our technology. However, any of our direct or indirect intellectual property rights could be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. Further, the laws of certain countries do not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. Therefore, in certain jurisdictions we may be unable to protect our technology adequately against unauthorized third-party use, which could adversely affect our business. Third parties also may claim that we or our customers are infringing upon their intellectual property rights. Even if we believe that the claims are without merit, the claims can be time-consuming and costly to defend and divert management’s attention and resources away from our business. Claims of intellectual property infringement also might require us to enter into costly settlement or license agreements or pay costly damage awards. Even if we have an agreement to indemnify us against such costs, the indemnifying party may be unable to uphold its contractual agreements to us. If we cannot or do not license the infringed technology at all or on reasonable terms or substitute similar technology from another source, our business could suffer.

 

A significant amount of our royalty revenues comes from a few market segments and products, and our business could be harmed if these market segments or products decline.

 

A significant portion of our royalty revenues comes from the manufacture and sale of packaged semiconductor chips for DSP, ASIC and memory. In addition, we derive substantial revenues from the incorporation of our technology into wireless phones. If demand for semiconductors in any one or a combination of these market segments or products declines, our royalty revenues may be reduced and our business could be harmed. Moreover, were such a decline to occur, our business could become more cyclical in nature.

 

Our revenue is concentrated in a few customers and if we lose any of these customers our revenues may decrease substantially.

 

We receive a significant amount of our revenues from a limited number of customers. In fiscal 2004, revenues from our top customer, Texas Instruments and Intel, accounted for 20% and 18% respectively, of our

 

28


Table of Contents

total revenues. We expect that a significant portion of our revenues will continue to come from a few customers for the foreseeable future. If we lose any of these customers, or if our revenues from them decline, our revenues may decrease substantially.

 

Future changes in financial accounting standards or practices or existing taxation rules or practices may cause adverse unexpected revenue and expense fluctuations and affect our reported results of operations.

 

A change in accounting standards or practices or a change in existing taxation rules or practices can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even affect our reporting of transactions completed before the change is effective. New accounting pronouncements and taxation rules and varying interpretations of accounting pronouncements and taxation practice have occurred and may occur in the future. Changes to existing rules or the questioning current practices may adversely affect our reported financial results or the way we conduct our business.

 

For example, in the year 2004 the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued its final standard on accounting for share-based payments (“SBP”), FASB Statement No. 123R (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (FAS 123R), that requires companies to expense the value of employee stock options and similar awards using fair value methodologies. This accounting change, scheduled for an effective date of June 15, 2005 or any changes in existing taxation rules related to stock options could have a significant negative effect on our reported results and on our ability to provide accurate guidance on our future reported financial results as a result of the variability of the factors used to establish the value of stock options.

 

We are subject to laws and regulations governing government contracts, and failure to address these laws and regulations or comply with government contracts could harm our business by leading to a reduction in revenue associated with these customers.

 

We have agreements relating to services provided to government entities and, as a result, we are subject to various statutes and regulations that apply to companies doing business with the government. The laws governing government contracts differ from the laws governing private contracts. For example, many government contracts contain pricing terms and conditions that are not applicable to private contracts. We are also subject to audits relating to compliance with the regulations governing government contracts. A failure to comply with these regulations might result in suspension of these contracts, debarment from future government contracts, or civil and criminal penalties. In addition, the government may acquire certain intellectual property rights in data produced or delivered under such contracts and inventions made under such contracts.

 

Our financial and operating results may vary which may cause the price of our common stock to decline.

 

We currently provide guidance on revenue and expense and cash taxes on a quarterly and annual basis. Our quarterly operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to do so in the future. Because our operating results are difficult to predict, you should not rely on quarterly or annual comparisons of our results of operations as an indication of our future performance. We have had positive net income since the fourth quarter of 2001. Factors that could cause our operating results to fluctuate during any period include those listed in this “Risk Factors” section of this report and the following:

 

    the timing and compliance with license or service agreement and the terms and conditions for payment to us of license or service fees under these agreements;

 

    changes in our royalties caused by changes in demand for products incorporating semiconductors that use our licensed technology;

 

    the amount of our service revenues;

 

    changes in the level of our operating expenses;

 

    delays in our introduction of new technologies or market acceptance of these new technologies through new license agreements;

 

 

29


Table of Contents
    our failure to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights;

 

    legal proceedings affecting our patents or patent applications;

 

    the timing of the introduction by others of competing technologies;

 

    changes in demand for semiconductor chips in the specific markets in which we concentrate—digital signal processor (DSP) semiconductors, application specific integrated circuits (ASIC) semiconductors, and memory;

 

    changes in accounting principles or a requirement to treat stock option grants as an operating expense; and

 

    cyclical fluctuations in semiconductor markets generally.

 

It is difficult to predict when we will enter into license agreements. The time it takes to establish a new licensing arrangement can be lengthy. Delays or deferrals in the execution of license agreements may also increase as we develop new technologies. Because we generally recognize a significant portion of license fee revenues in the quarter that the license is signed, the timing of signing license agreements may significantly impact our quarterly or annual operating results. Under our typical license agreements, we also receive ongoing royalty payments, and these may fluctuate significantly from period to period based on sales of products incorporating our licensed technology. We expect to expand our business rapidly which will require us to increase our operating expenses. We may not be able to increase revenues in an amount sufficient to offset these increased expenditures, which may lead to a loss for a quarterly period.

 

Due to fluctuations in our quarterly operating results and other factors, the price at which our common stock will trade is likely to continue to be highly volatile. In future periods, if our revenues or operating results are below our estimates or the estimates or expectations of public market analysts and investors, our stock price could decline. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against companies following a decline in the market price of their securities. Technology companies have experienced greater than average stock price volatility than companies in many other industries in recent years and, as a result, have, on average, been subject to a greater number of securities class action claims. If our stock price is volatile, we may become involved in this type of litigation in the future. Any litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources that are needed to successfully run our business.

 

System security risks and systems integration issues could disrupt our internal operations or services provided to customers, which could harm our revenue, increase our expenses and harm our reputation and stock price.

 

Despite system redundancy, the implementation of security measures and the continuous monitoring of our internal information technology networking systems processes and controls, our systems are vulnerable to damages from numerous sources, including but not limited to; computer viruses, unauthorized access, energy blackouts, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication failures. Experienced computer programmers and hackers may be able to penetrate our network security and misappropriate our confidential information or that of third parties, create system disruptions or cause shutdowns. As a result, we could incur significant expenses in addressing problems created by security breaches of our network. In addition, hardware and operating system software and applications that we procure from third parties may contain defects in design and manufacture, including “bugs” and other problems that can unexpectedly interfere with the operation of the system. The costs to eliminate or alleviate security problems, viruses and bugs could be significant, and the efforts to address these problems could result in interruptions, delays or cessation of service that may impede critical operating functions.

 

Portions of our IT infrastructure also may experience interruptions, delays or cessations of service or produce errors in connection with ongoing systems integration work. In particular, we are in the process of implementing new financial reporting and enterprise resource planning software. As a part of this effort, we are

 

30


Table of Contents

also upgrading hardware and existing software applications to support new implementations and administer our business information. We may not be successful in implementing the new systems and transitioning data and other aspects of the process could be expensive, time consuming, disruptive and resource intensive. Any disruptions that may occur in the implementation of the new systems or any future systems could adversely affect our ability to report in an accurate and timely manner the results of our operations, our financial position and cash flows. Disruptions to these systems could also interrupt operational processes and adversely impact our ability to provide services and support to our customers and fulfill contractual obligations. As a result, our results of our operations, financial position, cash flows and stock price could be adversely affected.

 

We recently evaluated our internal controls systems in order to allow management to report on, and our independent registered public accounting firm to attest to, our internal controls, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

 

We have performed the system and process evaluation and testing required for compliance with the management certification and auditor attestation requirements of Section 404. While we have implemented the requirements relating to internal controls and all other aspects of Section 404 in a timely fashion, we cannot be certain as to the timing of completion of our evaluation, testing and remediation actions for future finance related projects or the impact of the same on our operations since there is no precedent available by which to measure compliance adequacy. Current infrastructure projects to replace legacy accounting systems and other systems related to financial information require that we implement the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner for these new applications. If we do not complete these requirements in a timely fashion or with adequate compliance, we might be subject to investigation by regulatory authorities and a loss of public confidence in our internal controls, which could adversely affect our financial results and the market price of our common stock. In addition, to the extent that we or our independent registered public accounting firm identify a significant deficiency in our internal controls, the resources and costs required to remediate such deficiency could have a material adverse impact on our future results of operations.

 

We have a royalty-based business model, which is inherently risky.

 

Our long-term success depends on future royalties paid to us by licensees. Royalty payments are primarily based upon the number of electrical connections to the semiconductor chip in a package covered by our licensed technology, although we do have royalty arrangements in which royalties are paid based upon a percent of the net sales price or in which royalties are paid on a per package basis. We are dependent upon our ability to structure, negotiate and enforce agreements for the determination and payment of royalties. We face risks inherent in a royalty-based business model, many of which are outside of our control, such as the following:

 

    the rate of adoption and incorporation of our technology by semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers;

 

    the extent to which large equipment vendors and materials providers develop and supply tools and materials to enable manufacturing using our packaging technology;

 

    the demand for products incorporating semiconductors that use our licensed technology; and

 

    the cyclicality of supply and demand for products using our licensed technology.

 

It is difficult for us to verify royalty amounts owed to us under our licensing agreements, and this may cause us to lose revenues.

 

The standard terms of our license agreements require our licensees to document the manufacture and sale of products that incorporate our technology and report this data to us on a quarterly basis. Although our standard license terms give us the right to audit books and records of our licensees to verify this information, audits can be expensive, time consuming and potentially detrimental to our ongoing business relationship with our licensees. As a result, to date, we have primarily relied on the accuracy of the reports themselves without independently

 

31


Table of Contents

verifying the information in them. Our failure to audit our licensees’ books and records may result in us receiving less royalty revenues than we are entitled to under the terms of our license agreements.

 

Failure by our licensees to introduce products using our technology could limit our royalty revenue growth.

 

Because we expect a significant portion of our future revenues to be derived from royalties on semiconductors that use our licensed technology, our future success depends upon our licensees developing and introducing commercially successful products. Any of the following factors could limit our licensees’ ability to introduce products that incorporate our technology:

 

    the willingness and ability of materials and equipment suppliers to produce materials and equipment that support our licensed technology, in a quantity sufficient to enable volume manufacturing;

 

    the ability of our licensees to purchase such materials and equipment on a cost-effective and timely basis;

 

    the willingness of our licensees and others to make investments in the manufacturing process that supports our licensed technology, and the amount and timing of those investments; and

 

    our licensees’ ability to design and assemble packages incorporating our technology that are acceptable to their customers.

 

Failure by the semiconductor industry to adopt new high performance DRAM chips that utilize our packaging technology would significantly harm our business.

 

To date, our packaging technology has been used by several companies for high performance dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, chips. For example, packaging using our technology was designated by Rambus as the reference design package for its high performance Rambus DRAM chips. However, the DRAM designed by Rambus has not been widely adopted due to the use of competing technologies such as the first generation of DDR DRAM, which does not widely utilize advanced packaging technologies. DRAM manufacturers are also currently developing new high performance DRAM chips such as the next generation of DDR, referred to as DDR2 and DDR3, to meet increasing speed and performance requirements of electronic products. We believe that these new high performance DRAM chips will require advanced packaging technologies such as CSP, and we currently have licensees, including Samsung, who are paying royalties for DDR2 chips in advanced packages.

 

We anticipate that royalties from shipments of these new, high performance DRAM chips packaged using our technology may account for a significant percentage of our future revenues. If semiconductor manufacturers do not adopt new, high performance DRAM as quickly as is currently being projected by industry sources or find an alternate viable packaging technology for use with their high performance DRAM chips, or if we do not receive royalties from new, high performance DRAM chips that use our technology, our future revenues could be adversely affected.

 

Our technology may be too expensive for certain new, high performance DRAM manufacturers, which could significantly reduce the adoption rate of our packaging technology in new, high performance DRAM chips. Even if our package technology is selected for at least some of these new, high performance DRAM chips, there could be delays in the introduction of products utilizing these chips that could materially affect the amount and timing of any royalty payments that we receive. Other factors that could affect adoption of our technology for new, high performance DRAM products include delays or shortages of materials and equipment and the availability of testing services.

 

Competing technologies may harm our business.

 

We expect that our technologies will continue to compete with technologies of internal design groups of semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers. These internal design groups create their own packaging solutions,

 

32


Table of Contents

and have direct access to their company’s technical information and technology roadmaps, and have capacity, cost and technical advantages over us. If these internal design groups design around our patents, they may not need to license our technology. These groups may design package technology that is less expensive to implement than ours or provides products with higher performance or additional features. Many of these groups have substantially greater resources, financial or otherwise, than us and lower cost structures. As a result, they may be able to get their package technology adopted more easily and quickly. For instance, certain flip chip technologies are being used by large semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers for a variety of semiconductors, including processors and memory. Another example of a competitive technology is the small format lead frame packages that are also gaining popularity. The companies using these technologies are utilizing their current lead frame infrastructure to achieve cost-effective results.

 

In the future, our licensed technologies may also compete with other package technologies. These technologies may be less expensive than ours and prov