UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20062007

OR

Commission file number: 000-27163

Kana Software, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

(650) 614-8300

(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, $0.001 par value per share

(Title of class)

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

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 (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the 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 a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer.filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitionthe definitions of “accelerated filer and large“large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  ¨    Accelerated filer  x

¨Non-accelerated filer  x¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

As of June 30, 2006,29, 2007, the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $63,857,628$93,546,679 based upon the closing sales price of the Registrant’s Common Stock as reported on the NASDAQ National MarketOver the Counter Bulletin Board of $1.85.$3.10.

At February 28, 200729, 2008 the Registrant had outstanding approximately 35,998,72541,062,724 shares of Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s Proxy Statement for the 20072008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated herein by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to the extent stated herein.

Kana Software, Inc.

Form 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 20062007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

In addition to historical information, this report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The forward-looking statements are not historical facts but rather are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our business and industry, and our beliefs and assumptions. Words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expects,“expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “will” and variations of these words and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those described in Item 1A “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. Forward-looking statements that were believed to be true at the time made may ultimately prove to be incorrect or false. We undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements. Given these risks and uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.

Overview

Kana Software, Inc. (the “Company” or “KANA”) offers an innovative approach to customer service with cost-effective solutions that enhance the quality of multi-channel customer interactions. Built on open standards for a high degree of adaptability and integration, KANA solutions intelligently automate the processes needed to successfully serve our clients’ customers, so that our clients can deliver higher value service at lower cost. KANA providescost, increasing customer retention and loyalty. We provide an integrated solution which enables organizations to deliver consistent, managed service across all channels, including email,e-mail, chat, call centers and Web self-service, ensuring a consistent service experience across communication channels. We are headquartered in Menlo Park, California, with offices in Japan Hong Kong and throughout the United States and Europe.

We were incorporated in July 1996 in California and reincorporated in Delaware in September 1999. References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “we,” “our” and “us” collectively refer to KANA, our predecessor and our subsidiaries and itstheir predecessors. Our principal executive offices are located at 181 Constitution Drive, Menlo Park, California 94025 and our telephone number is (650) 614-8300. Our Internet website is located at http://www.kana.com. We make available free of charge on our website our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). All such filings are also available at the SEC Public Reference Room at 100F100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. Information regarding the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-(800)-SEC-0330. The SEC also maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC which can be found at http://www.sec.gov.

Our Strategy

Deliver world-class products & solutions that focus on improving customer satisfaction,loyalty and retention, increasing corporate revenue and reducing the cost to provide customer service. We believe that a significant percentage of an enterprise’s cost of providing service to its customers resides in resolvingefficiently and effectively answering individual customer questions and problems, or cases. These cases must be received, routed, tracked and resolved by customer service agents. While many enterprises possess technology capable of routing and tracking cases, the actual resolution of customer issues is largely unautomated, and therefore is particularly costly. Our product portfolio addresses this largely underserved customer service resolution market. Our knowledge-powered customer service solutions focus on automating the service resolution processexperience across

multiple channels. The majority of our license revenues are for applications that are used by our customers’ agents (Assisted Service), or directly by their customers (Web Self-Service), empowering them with knowledge and information to resolve their issues.

Partner with the world’s leading systemsystems integrators. Our strategy is to focus our efforts on the sale of software and support and to enter into strategic relationships with leading systems integrators in order to provide our customers with a wide range of implementation, systems integration and consulting services. Our professional services organization augments thewas augmented in 2007 by our acquisition of eVergance Partners LLC (“eVergance”), a consulting and services firm that provides our systems integrator partners’partners with additional resources withand subject matter expertise on our applications. Our customers can benefit from thethese systems integrators’ deep KANA expertise of our products, as well as their outstanding industry knowledge and proven integration success. In addition, these systems integrators employ larger sales forces than we do, and we generally coordinate our sales efforts with them.

Deliver industry-specific applications. Some industries, such as banking, telecommunications and healthcare, have exceptionally high volumes of customer interactions, and providing consistent and accurate feedback to customers of companies in these industries has become increasingly difficult as the products and offerings of such companies have become increasingly complicated. We continue to expand our portfolio of applications to address the unique needs ofthrough our customers through a series of industry starter kits.professional services and systems integrator relationships.

Products

KANA providesWe provide a suite of customer service software. Around the world, KANA’sour multi-channel customer service solutions are helping Globalglobal 2000 companies provide more intelligent, effective interactions with customers, helping them build loyal and lasting customer relationships while reducing costs in the contact center.

KANA’sOur suite of multi-channel solutions is built on open standards for a high degree of adaptability and flexibility. KANAOur solutions provide a critical link between contactcall centers and marketing departments,transactional back end systems, allowing organizations to have effective, efficient interactions with customers across points of contact (including web,Web, telephone and e-mail) and throughout the enterprise. KANA employsWe employ robust reporting tools across itsour entire product family to allow companies to continually analyze and improve their customer and partner relationships. These features enable Globalglobal 2000 companies and other enterprises to reduce the cost of information access for their employees, customers and partners while creating profitable customer relationships.

Our customers can deploy KANA’sour multi-channel solutions as a complete suite or as separate applications. Our solutions include the following products:

Our applications are designed to easily integrate with other enterprise software and legacy systems. They can be installed on systems running Solaris, AIX, Linux or Windows operating systems, and provide customers with capabilities for personalization, customer profile management, inquiry management, universal business rules, knowledge management and extranet workflow. They can be linked with customers’ legacy systems allowing customers to design their systems to preserve previous investments. Our service orientatedoriented architecture uses data modeling to make data located in external systems available in our application without requiring the data to be moved or replicated. KANA’sOur applications are built on a single web-architectedWeb-architected platform, which we refer to as KANA’sour Enterprise Application Framework. This service-oriented framework provides KANA’sour customers with full access to our applications using a standard webWeb browser and without requiring them to install additional software on their individual computers. We also offer our applications on a hosted basis, through our Enterprise OnDemand service offering forwhere we offer our solutions in a subscription fee.managed service environment. The Enterprise OnDemand service offering delivers enterprise-class security, reliability and performance needed for high-volume customer service operations, as well as a “Software as a Service” solution.operations.

Alliances

We enter into strategic relationships with leading systems integrators that have developed significant expertise with our web-architectedWeb-architected applications and are able to provide customers with a wide range of consulting, implementation and systems integration services. Our systems integrator partners are involved in most customer engagements and, in 2001, we significantly reduced the size of our professional services team and narrowed the scope of our professional services program in part to ensure that we did not compete with these key partners for professional services engagements. In addition, many of these systems integrators act as resellers for our products, and we rely on them for assistance in driving our sales efforts. We believe that support for our products by these systems integrators is increasingly important in influencing new customers’ decisions to license our products. Our systems integrator partners include Accenture BearingPoint, and International Business Machines (“IBM”) Business Consulting Services. These systems integrators have been integral to KANA’sour success in selling itsour products to large-organizations such as Advanced Micro Devices, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota,Best Buy, Cummins, Dell Computer Corp., eBay, Highmark, O2, Sony Electronics, Inc., Sprint, Wachovia and Yahoo!.

Services and Support

Customer Support. Our customer support group uses KANA’sour own applications to provide multi-channel global support for our customers and partners, including phone and e-mail support and soon will be releasing self-service support solutions via our KANA Customer and KANA Partner customer support portals.

Professional Services. Our worldwide consulting and education services group provides business and technical expertise to support our customers and alliance partners and customers.partners. Our consulting services group works closely with our customers to address the people and process areas common to every enterprise deployment along with systems integrators during implementations to lend technical experience and functional product expertise and to assist the systems integrators in providing our customers with high-quality, successful, enterprise-wide implementations. Education services providesprovide a full set of training programs and materials for our customers and partners, including a comprehensive set of courses for end users, business consultants and developers, which are available through instructor-led, web-basedWeb-based and on-site classes.

Each of our service groups provideprovides up-to-date information to our customers and partners through quarterly newsletters, as well as real time updates to our customer and partner facing knowledge base.

Sales

Our sales strategy is to focus on Globalglobal 2000 companies through a combination of strategic alliances and our direct sales force.force with a named account strategy. We have focused sales teams on three targeted verticals—financial services, communications and federal government—as well as commercial sales teams that cover named accounts within geographical territories. We maintain direct sales personnel across the United States and internationally throughoutin the United Kingdom, Ireland, Continental Europe, Asia-PacificAsia Pacific, Japan and Canada. In 2006, we added anOur Inside Sales Organization focuses on a departmental strategy within the global 2000 non-named accounts and the high end of the mid-market. We also have an international sales group that is focused on the small, medium business (SMB) marketplace.works with our existing customers to renew their maintenance.

Customers

Our customers range from Globalglobal 2000 companies to growing companies pursuing an e-business strategy. The following is a list of customers that we believe are representative of our overall customer base:

CAP GEMINI
High Technology		Transportation/Hospitality
IBM		KLM
Hewlett-PackardLinkedIn		Northwest Airlines
IBM		Priceline.com
Linkedin		Travelocity
Malam Information Technologies		Priceline.com
NEC		Starwood Hotels
Palm		Travelocity
Siemens
Texas Instruments
Yahoo!

Manufacturing/Consumer Goods		Retail
ADCCanon		1-800 Flowers1-800-Flowers
CanonCreative Labs		Avon.com
Creative LabsCummins		Barnes & Noble.com
Daimler-Chrysler		eBayBest Buy
Nissan		HermèseBay
Polycom		Home Depot
Sony Electronics, Inc.Taylor Made		Staples.com
Taylor MadeXerox		Target
Xerox		The Gap
		Williams-SonomaTiffany & Company

No customer accounted for 10% or more of our total revenues in 2006. One customer, IBM, who resells our software to its customers, accounted for 11% of our total revenues in both 2005 and 2004.2007. A substantial portion of our license and serviceservices revenues in any given quarter has been, and we expect will continue to be, generated from a limited number of customers. Our chief operating decision maker reviews financial information presented on a consolidated basis, accompanied by disaggregated information about revenues by geographic region for purposes of making operating decisions and assessing financial performance. Accordingly, weWe consider ourselves to be in a single industry segment: segment—specifically, the licensing and support of our software applications. Revenue classification is based upon customer location. See Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for geographic information on revenuerevenues for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004 and our long-lived assets (Property and Equipment, net, and Other Assets), at December 31,2007, 2006, and 2005.

Research and Development

We believe that strong product development capabilities are essential to our strategy of enhancing our core technology, developing additional applications incorporating that technology and maintaining the competitiveness of our product and service offerings. We have invested significant time and resources in creating a structured process for undertaking all product development. In the first quarter of 2003, we began implementing an outsourcing strategy, which involves subcontracting a significant portion of our software programming, quality assurance and technical documentation activities to HCL, Accenture, IBM and BearingPoint with staffing in India and China. A substantial amount of outsourcing resources was devoted to developing a new version of our solutions on a J2EE architecture, which was released in December 2004. We began to significantly reduce the scope of our outsourced development activities in early 2005 to better align our costs with our revenues and inrevenues. In 2006, we began to move all product development back on-shore to our offices in Menlo Park, California and Manchester, New Hampshire. This reducesredeployment reduced our cost and dependency on outside firms. In early January 2007, we completed the back-shoring of our development environment.

Our success significantly depends on our ability to enhance our existing customer service solutions and to develop new services, functionality and technology that address the increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our existing and prospective customers. The challenges of developing new products and enhancements require us to commit a substantial amount of resources, and weresources. We might not be able to develop or introduce new products on a timely or cost-effective basis, or at all, which could lead existing and potential customers to choose a competitor’s products.

Our research and development expenses were $12.7 million, $10.8 million and $13.2 million in 2007, 2006 and $19.6 million in 2006, 2005, and 2004 respectively.

Competition

The market for our products and services is intensely competitive, evolving and subject to rapid technological change. We currently face competition for our products from software designed by our customers’ in-house development teams and by third parties. We expect that these competing software applications willto continue to be a major source of competition for the foreseeable future. Our primary competitors for customer relationship management (“CRM”) software platforms are larger, more established companies such as Oracle. We also face competition from Chordiant Software, ATG, Amdocs, Knova (a subsidiary of Consona, Corporation), Talisma, eGain, RightNow, Instranet, Inquira and Pegasystems with respect to several specific applications we offer. We may face increased competition upon introduction of new products or upgrades from competitors, especially knowledge-powered products.

We believe that the principal competitive factors affecting our industry include having a significant base of customers recommending our products, the breadth and depth of a given solution, product cost, product quality and performance, customer service, product scalability and reliability, product features, ability to implement solutions and perception of financial position. We believe that our products currently compete favorably with respect to many of these factors, and, in particular, that our web-basedWeb-based architecture provides us with a competitive advantage because it allows for greater product scalability and rapid implementation. However, we may not be able to maintain our competitive position against current and potential competitors, especially those with greater financial, marketing, service, support, technical and other resources, and who may, for example, be able to add features or functionality to their competing products more quickly or decide to sell their products to their existing customer bases for other products.

Seasonality

Many of our competitors have longer operating histories, significantly greater financial, technical, marketingOur business is influenced by seasonal trends, largely due to customer buying patterns. These trends may include higher license revenues in the fourth quarter as many customers complete annual budgetary cycles and other resources, significantly greater name recognitionlower license revenues in the first quarter and a larger installed base of customers than we have. In addition,summer months when many of our competitors have well-established relationships withprospects and customers experience lower sales. Our professional services are negatively impacted in the fourth quarter due to the holiday season, in which fewer billable hours are available for our current and potential customers and have extensive knowledge ofconsultants. In addition, our industry. We may lose potential customers to competitors for various reasons, includinginternational operations experience a slow down in the possible introduction by competitors of new software hosting technologies, which could be more scalable, easier to implement and cheaper than the current technologies, and the ability or willingness of competitors to offer lower prices and other incentives that we cannot match. It is possible that new competitors or alliances among competitors may emerge and rapidly acquire significant market share. We also expect that competition will increase as a result of industry consolidations.summer months.

Intellectual Property

We rely upon a combination of patent, copyright, trade secret and trademark laws, and contractual restrictions, such as confidentiality agreements and licenses, to establish and protect our proprietary rights. We currently have sixfive issued U.S. patents, fourthree of which expire in 2018 and two of which expire in 2020, and a number of U.S. patent applications pending. Our pending applications, if allowed, in conjunction with our issued patents, would cover a significant portion of the technology underlying our products and services. We have also filed international patent applications corresponding to some of our U.S. applications. In addition, we have several trademarks that are registered or pending registration in the U.S. and abroad. Although we rely on patent, copyright, trade secret and trademark lawlaws to protect our technology, we believe that factors such as the technological and creative skills of our personnel, new product development, frequent product enhancements and reliable product maintenance are more essential to establishing and maintaining a technology leadership position.

Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary rights, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy or otherwise obtain and use our products or technology or to develop products with the same functionality as our products. Policing unauthorized use of our products is difficult. Also, the laws of other countries in which we market our products may offer little or no effective protection of our proprietary technology. Furthermore, our competitors could independently develop technologies equivalent to ours, and our intellectual property rights may not be broad enough for us to prevent such competitors from selling products incorporating those technologies. Reverse engineering, unauthorized copying or other misappropriation of our proprietary technology could enable third parties to benefit from our technology without paying us for it, which would significantly harm our business.

Substantial litigation regarding intellectual property rights exists in our industry. We expect that software in our industry may be increasingly subject to third-party infringement claims as the number of competitors grows and the functionality of products in different industry segments overlaps. Some of our competitors in the market for customer communications software may have filed or may intend to file patent applications covering aspects of their technology that they may claim our technology infringes. Such competitors could make a claim of infringement against us with respect to our products and technology. Third parties may currently have, or may eventually be issued, patents upon which our current or future products or technology infringe. Any of these third parties might make a claim of infringement against us. See Item 1A “Risk Factors”—”“We may become involved in litigation over proprietary rights, which could be costly and time consuming.”

Backlog

As of December 31, 20062007 and 20052006, we had $18.7$20.1 million and $17.9$18.7 million, respectively, in backlog, which relates to firm orders, with $523,000$419,000 and $516,000,$523,000, respectively, not expected to be recognized within one year due to the timing of obligations in the underlying agreement.agreements. The substantial majority of these firm orders relates to annual support contracts, and was invoiced and recorded as deferred revenue as of December 31, 20062007 and 2005.2006.

Employees

As of December 31, 2006,2007, we had 181225 full-time employees, compared to 125181 full-time employees as of December 31, 2005.2006. Of the 181225 employees at December 31, 2006, 482007, 68 were in our services and support group, 6563 were in sales and marketing, 3753 were in research and development and 3141 were in finance, legal, information technology (“IT”) and administration.

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS.

We operate in a dynamic and rapidly changing business environment that involves substantial risks and uncertainty, including but not limited to the specific risks identified below. The risks described below are not the only ones facing our company. Additional risks not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, may become important factors that impair our business operations. Any of these risks could cause, or contribute to causing, our actual results to differ materially from expectations. Prospective and existing investors are strongly urged to carefully consider the various cautionary statements and risks set forth in this report and our other public filings.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

We have a history of losses and may not be able to generate sufficient revenuerevenues to achieve and maintain profitability.

Since we began operations in 1997, our revenues have not been sufficient to support our operations, and we have incurred substantial operating losses every year. As of December 31, 2006,2007, our accumulated deficit was approximately $4.3 billion, which includes approximately $2.7 billion related to goodwill impairment charges. Our stockholders’ deficitequity at December 31, 20062007 was $3.1$4.4 million. We continue to commit a substantial investment of resources to sales, product marketing and developing new products and enhancements, and we will need to increase our revenuerevenues to achieve profitability and positive cash flows. Our expectations as to when we can achieve positive cash flows, and as to our future cash balances, are subject to a number of assumptions, including assumptions regarding improvements in general economic conditions and customer purchasing and payment patterns, many of which are beyond our control. Our history of losses has previously caused some of our potential customers to question our viability, which has in turn hampered our ability to sell some of our products. Additionally, our revenue hasrevenues have been affected by the uncertain economic conditions in recent years, both generally and in our market. As a result of these conditions, we have experienced and expect to continue to experience difficulties in attracting new customers, which means that, even if sales of our products and services grow, we may continue to experience losses, which may cause the price of our stock to decline.

The relatively large size of many of our expected license transactions could contribute to our failure to meet expected sales in any given quarter and could materially harm our operating results.

Our revenues and results of operations may fluctuate as a result of a variety of factors. Our revenues are especially subject to fluctuation because they depend on the completion of relatively large orders for our products and related services. The average size of our license transactions is generally large relative to our total revenuerevenues in any quarter, particularly as we have focused on larger enterprise customers, on licensing our more comprehensive integrated products, and have involved systemsystems integrators in our sales process. If sales expected from a specific customer in a particular quarter are not realized in that quarter, we are unlikely to be able to generate revenue from alternate sources in time to compensate for the shortfall. Fluctuations in our results of operations may be due to a number of additional factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to retain and increase our customer base, changes in our pricing policies or those of our competitors, the timing and success of new product introductions by us or our competitors, the sales cycle for our products, our fixed expenses, the purchasing and budgeting cycles of our clients, and general economic, industry and marketing conditions.

This dependence on large orders makes our net revenuerevenues and operating results more likely to vary from quarter to quarter, and more difficult to predict, because the loss of any particular large order is significant. In recent periods, we have experienced increases in the length of a typical sales cycle. This trend may add to the uncertainty of our future operating results and reduce our ability to anticipate our future revenues. Moreover, to the extent that significant sales occur earlier than anticipated, revenues for subsequent quarters may be lower than expected. As a result, our operating results could suffer if any large orders are delayed or canceled in any future period. In part as a result of this aspect of our business, our quarterly revenues and operating results may fluctuate in future periods and we may fail to meet the expectations of investors and public market analysts, which could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

We may not be able to forecast our revenues accurately because our products have a long and variable sales cycle and we rely on systems integrator partnersintegrators for sales.

The long sales cycle for our products may cause license revenuerevenues and operating results to vary significantly from period to period. To date, the sales cycle for most of our product sales has taken anywhere from 6 to 189 months. Our sales cycle typically requires pre-purchase evaluation by a significant number of individuals inwithin our customers’ organizations. Along with third parties that often jointly market our software with us, we invest significant amountsamount of time and resources educating and providing information to prospective customers regarding the use and benefits of our products. Many of our customers evaluate our software slowly and deliberately, depending on the specific technical capabilities of the customer, the size of the deployment, the complexity of the customer’s network environment, and the quantity of hardware and the degree of hardware configuration necessary to deploy our products.

Furthermore, we rely to a significant extent on systems integrators to identify, influence and manage large transactions with customers, and we expect this trend to continue as our industry consolidates. Selling our products in conjunction with our systems integrators who incorporate our products into their offerings can involve a particularly long and unpredictable sales cycle, as it typically takes more time for the prospective customer to evaluate proposals from multiple vendors. In addition, when systems integrators propose the use of our products to their customers, it is typically part of a larger project, which can require moreadditional levels of customer approvals. We have little or no control over the sales cycle of an integrator-led transaction or our customers’ budgetary constraints and internal decision-making and acceptance processes.

As a result of increasingly long sales cycles, we have faced increased difficulty in predicting our operating results for any given period, and have experienced significant unanticipated fluctuations in our revenues from period to period. Any failure to achieve anticipated revenues for a period could cause our stock price to decline.

Our business relies heavily on customer service solutions, and these solutions may not gain market acceptance.

We have made customer service solutions our main focus and, in recent periods, have allocated a significant portion of our research and development and marketing resources to the development and promotion of such products. If these products are not accepted by potential customers, our business would be materially adversely affected. For our current business model to succeed, we believe that we will need to convince new and existing customers of the merits of purchasing our customer service solutions over traditional customer relationship management, or CRM solutions and competitors’ customer service solutions. Many of these customers have previously invested substantial resources in adopting and implementing their existing CRM products, whether such products are ours or are those of our competitors. We may be unable to convince customers and potential customers that it is worth themthe benefits of purchasing substantial new software packages tothat provide them with our specific customer service capabilities. If our strategy of offering customer service solutions fails, we may not be able to sell sufficient quantities of our product offerings to generate significant license revenues, and our business could be harmed.

Our expenses are generally fixed and we will not be able to reduce these expenses quickly if we fail to meet our revenue expectations.

Most of our expenses, such as employee compensation, and outsourcing of technical support and certain development functions, are relatively fixed in the short term. Other expenses like leases are fixed and are more long term. Moreover, our forecast is based, in part, upon our expectations regarding future revenue levels. As a result, in any particular quarter our total revenuerevenues can be below expectation and we could not proportionately reduce operating expenses for that quarter. Accordingly, such a revenue shortfall would have a disproportionate negative effect on our expected operating results for that quarter.

If we fail to generate sufficient revenues to support our business and require additional financing, failure to obtain such financing would affect our ability to maintain our operations and to grow our business, and the terms of any financing we obtain may impair the rights of our existing stockholders.

In the future, we may be required to seek additional financing to fund our operations or growth, and such financing may not be available to us, or may impair the rights of our existing stockholders. Furthermore, any failure to raise sufficient capital in a timely fashion could prevent us from growing or pursuing our strategies or cause us to limit our operations and cause potential customers to question our financial viability. We had cash and cash equivalents of $5.7$4.3 million at December 31, 2006.2007, and as of such date, had contractual commitments of $6.6 million in 2008. It is possible that our cash position could decrease over the next few quarters and some customers will becould become increasingly concerned about our cash situation and our ongoing ability to update and maintain our products. This could significantly harm our sales efforts.

Factors such as the commercial success of our existing products and services, the timing and success of any new products and services, the progress of our research and development efforts, our results of operations, the status of competitive products and services, and the timing and success of potential strategic alliances or potential opportunities to acquire or sell technologies or assets may require us to seek additional funding sooner than we expect. In the event that we require additional cash, we may not be able to secure additional financing on terms that are acceptable to us, especially in the current uncertain market climate, and we may not be successful in implementing or negotiating other arrangements to improve our cash position. If we raise additional funds through the issuance of equity or convertible debt securities, the percentage ownership of our stockholders would be reduced and the securities we issue might have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of our current stockholders. If adequate funds were not available on acceptable terms, our ability to achieve or sustain positive cash flows, maintain current operations, fund any potential expansion, take advantage of unanticipated opportunities, develop or enhance products or services, or otherwise respond to competitive pressures would be significantly limited.

7

If we fail to grow our customer base or generate repeat business, our operating results could be harmed.

Our business model generally depends on the sale of our products to new customers as well as on expanded use of our products within our customers’ organizations. If we fail to grow our customer base or generate repeat and expanded business from our current and future customers, our business and operating results will be seriously harmed. In some cases, our customers initially make a limited purchase of our products and services for pilot programs. These customers may not purchase additional licenses to expand their use of our products. If these customers do not successfully develop and deploy initial applications based on our products, they may choose not to purchase deployment licenses or additional development licenses. In addition, as we introduce new versions of our products, new product lines or new product features, our current customers might not require the additional functionality we offer and might not ultimately license these products. Furthermore, because the total amount of maintenance and support fees we receive in any period depends in large part on the size and number of licenses that we have previously sold, any downturn in our software license revenuerevenues would negatively affect our future services revenue. Also, if customers elect not to renew their support agreements, our services revenue could decline significantly. If customers are unable to pay for their current products or are unwilling to purchase additional products, our revenues would decline. Additionally, a substantial percentage of our sales come from repeat customers. If a significant existing customer or a group of existing customers decide not to repeat business with us, our revenues would decline and our business would be harmed.

We face substantial competition and may not be able to compete effectively.

The market for our products and services is intensely competitive, evolving, and subject to rapid technological change. From time to time, our competitors reduce the prices of their products and services (substantially in certain cases) in order to obtain new customers. Competitive pressures could make it difficult for us to acquire and retain customers and could require us to reduce the price of our products. Any such changes would likely reduce margins and could adversely affect operating results.

Our customers’ requirements and the technology available to satisfy those requirements are continually changing. Therefore, we must be able to respond to these changes in order to remain competitive. If our international development partners do not adequately perform the software programming, quality assurance, and technical documentation activities we outsourced, we may not be able to respond to such changes as quickly or effectively. Changes in our products may also make it more difficult for our sales force to sell effectively. In addition, changes in customers’ demand for the specific products, product features and services of other companies’companies may result in our products becoming uncompetitive. We expect the intensity of competition to increase in the future. Furthermore, we could lose market share if our competitors introduce new competitive products, add new functionality, acquire competitive products, reduce prices or form strategic alliances with other companies. We may not be able to compete successfully against current and future competitors, and competitive pressures may seriously harm our business.

Our competitors vary in size and in the scope and breadth of products and services offered. We currently face competition with our products from systems designed in-house and by our competitors. We expect that these systems will continue to be a major source of competition for the foreseeable future. Our primary competitors for electronic CRM platforms are larger, more established companies such as Oracle, which recently acquired Siebel Systems. The rate at which competitors are consolidating is increasing.Oracle. We also face competition from Chordiant Software, ATG, Amdocs, Knova (a subsidiary of Consona, Corporation), Talisma, eGain, RightNow, Instranet, Inquira and Pegasystems with respect to specific applications we offer. We may face increased competition upon introduction of new products or upgrades from competitors, or if we expand our product line through acquisition of complementary businesses or otherwise. As we have combined and enhanced our product lines to offer a more comprehensive software solution, we are increasingly competing with large, established providers of customer management and communication solutions as well as other competitors. Our combined product line may not be sufficient to successfully compete with the product offerings available from these companies, which could slow our growth and harm our business.

Many of our competitors have longer operating histories, significantly greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources, significantly greater name recognition and a larger installed base of customers than we have. As a result, our competitors may be able to respond more quickly than we can to new or changing opportunities, technologies, standards or client requirements or devote greater resources to the promotion and sale of their products and services than we can. In addition, many of our competitors have well-established relationships with our current and potential customers and have extensive knowledge of our industry. We may lose potential customers to competitors for various reasons, including the ability or willingness of competitors to offer lower prices and other incentives that we cannot match. It is possible that new competitors or alliances among competitors may emerge and rapidly acquire significant market share. We also expect that competition will increase as a result of recent industry consolidations, as well as anticipated future consolidations.

We rely on marketing, technology and distribution relationships for the sale, installation and support of our products that may generally be terminated at any time, and if our current and future relationships are not successful, our growth might be limited.

We rely on marketing and technology relationships with a variety of companies, including systems integrators or “SIs” and consulting firms that, among other things, generate leads for the sale of our products and provide our customers with implementation and ongoing support. If we cannot maintain successful marketing and technology relationships or if we fail to enter into such additional such relationships, we could have difficulty expanding the sales of our products and our growth might be limited.

A significant percentageportion of our revenues dependdepends on leads generated by SIssystems integrators and their recommendations of our products. If SIssystems integrators do not successfully market our products, our operating results will be materially harmed. In addition, many of our direct sales are to customers that will be relying on SIssystems integrators to implement our products, and if SIssystems integrators are not familiar with our technology or able to successfully implement our products, our operating results will be materially harmed. We expect to continue increasing our leverage of SIssystems integrators as indirect sales channels and, if this strategy is successful, our dependence on the efforts of these third parties for revenue growth and customer service will remain high. Our reliance on third parties for these functions has reduced our control over such activities and reduced our ability to

perform such functions internally. If we come to rely primarily on a single SIsystems integrator that subsequently terminates its relationship with us, becomes insolvent or is acquired by another company with which we have no relationship, or decides not to provide implementation services related to our products, we may not be able to internally generate sufficient revenuerevenues or increase the revenues generated by our other SIsystems integrator relationships to offset the resulting lost revenues. Furthermore, SIssystems integrators typically suggest our solution in combination with other products and services, some of which may compete with our solution. SIsSystems integrators are not required to promote any fixed quantities of our products, are not bound to promote our products exclusively and may act as indirect sales channels for our competitors. If these companiessystems integrators choose not to promote our products or if they develop, market or recommend software applications that compete with our products, our business will be harmed.

In addition to relying on SIssystems integrators to recommend our products, we also rely on SIssystems integrators and other third-party resellers to install and support our products. If the companies providing these services fail to implement our products successfully for our customers, the customer may be unable to complete implementation on the schedule that it had anticipated and we may have increased customer dissatisfaction or difficulty making future sales as a result. We might not be able to maintain our relationships with SIssystems integrators and other indirect sales channel partners and enter into additional relationships that will provide timely and cost-effective customer support and service. If we cannot maintain successful relationships with our indirect sales channel partners, we might have difficulty expanding the sales of our products and our growth could be limited. In addition, if such third parties do not provide the support our customers need, we may be required to hire subcontractors to provide these professional services. Increased use of subcontractors would harm our margins because it costs us more to hire subcontractors to perform these services than it would to provide the services ourselves.

Because certain customers account for a substantial portion of our revenues, the loss of a significant customer could cause a substantial decline in our revenues.

One customer, IBM, who resells our software to its customers, accounted for 9%, 11% and 11% of our revenuerevenues in 2005, and less than 10% of our revenues in 2006 2005 and 2004 respectively.2007. Given that we derive a significant portion of our license and serviceservices revenues from IBM, the loss of this customer could cause a decrease in revenues and operating results. Furthermore, if we lose major customers, or if a contract is delayed or cancelled or we do not contract with new major customers, our revenues and net loss would be adversely affected. In addition, customers that have accounted for significant revenues in the past may not generate revenues in any future period, and our failure to obtain new significant customers or additional orders from existing customers could materially affect our operating results.

We may not receive significant revenues from our current research and development efforts for several years, if at all.

Developing and localizing software is expensive and the investment in product development often involves a long payback cycle. We have and expect to continue making significant investments in software research and development and related product opportunities. Enhancing our products and pursuing new product developments require high levels of expenditures for research and development that could adversely affect our operating results if not offset by revenue increases. We believe that we must continue to dedicate a significant amount of resources to our research and development efforts to maintain our competitive position. However, we do not expect to receive significant revenues from these investments for several years, if at all.

Changes in our workforce may adversely affect our ability to release products and product updates in a timely manner.

We reducedincreased our employee headcount in 2005 from a total of 181 as of December 31, 2004 to 125 as of December 31, 2005 and then increased to 181 as of December 31, 2006. The majority2006 and to 225 as of the 2005 reduction was the result of our decision to shift a significant portion of our software programming, quality assurance and technical documentation activities to international development partners in early 2003, a strategy we have since reversed through our “back-shoring” process.December 31, 2007. We reducedincreased the size of our research and development department from 34 employees as of December 31, 2004, to 30 employees as of December 31, 2005 and then increased to 37 as of December 31, 2006.2006 and to 53 as of December 31, 2007. In

addition, we reduced the level of our expenditures on outsourced development in 2005, and, in December 2005, we consolidated a significant portion of our research and development operations into one location in Menlo Park, California to optimize our research and development processes and decrease overall operating expenses. As a result, we terminated the employment of 15 employees based in our New Hampshire office. The changes in our research and development headcount and the reductions in our outsourced development capacity may limit our ability to release products within expected timeframes. For example, many of the employees who were terminated in headcount reductions possessed specific knowledge or expertise that may prove to have been important to our operation, and which was not replaced in our more recent headcount increases. As a result, our ability to respond to unexpected challenges may be impaired and we may be unable to take advantage of new opportunities. Personnel reductions may also subject us to the risk of litigation, which may adversely impact our ability to conduct our operations and may cause us to incur significant expense. Our termination

If our cost reduction and restructuring efforts are ineffective, our revenues and profitability may be hurt.

In July 2007, we undertook various cost reduction and restructuring activities. The expense related to our reduction in work force was approximately $240,000 and expense related to ceasing use of two outsourcing arrangementsone of our offices was approximately $8,000. In September 2007, we agreed with the landlord of one of the facilities included in early 2005our restructuring accrual to surrender the remaining term of the lease in exchange for a lump sum cash payment. As a result of this agreement, we recorded additional restructuring expense of approximately $319,000. In addition, the cost reduction and restructuring activities may further reducenot produce the full efficiencies and benefits we expect or the efficiencies and benefits might be delayed. There can be no assurance that these efforts, as well as any potential future cost reduction and restructuring activities, will not adversely affect our ability to respond to development challenges and to introduce new productsbusiness, operations or customer perceptions, or result in expected timeframes.additional future charges.

We may be unable to hire and retain the skilled personnel necessary to develop and grow our business.

We rely on the continued service of our senior management and other key employees and the hiring of new qualified employees. In the software industry, there is substantial and continuous competition for highly skilled business, product development, technical and other personnel. Given the concern over our long-term financial strength, we may not be successful in recruiting and integrating new personnel and retaining and motivating existing personnel, which could lead to increased turnover and reduce our ability to meet the needs of our current and future customers. Because our stock price declined drastically in recent years, and has not experienced any sustained recovery from the decline, stock-based compensation, including options to purchase our common stock, may have diminished the effectiveness as employee hiring and retention devices. If we are unable to retain qualified personnel, we could face disruptions to operations, loss of key information, expertise or know-how and unanticipated additional recruitment and training costs. If employee turnover increases, our ability to provide customer service and execute our strategy would be negatively affected.

For example, our ability to increase revenues in the future depends considerably upon our success in training and retaining effective direct sales personnel and the success of our direct sales force. We might not be successful in these efforts. Our products and services require sophisticated sales efforts. We have experienced significant turnover in our sales force including domestic senior sales management, and may experience further turnover in future periods. It generally takes a new salesperson nine or more months to become productive, and they may not be able to generate new sales. Our business will be harmed if we fail to retain qualified sales personnel, or if newly hired salespeople fail to develop the necessary sales skills or develop these skills more slowly than anticipated. Additionally, we continue to need to recruit experienced developers as a result of our back-shoring initiative.

If we fail to respond to changing customer preferences in our market, demand for our products and our ability to enhance our revenues will suffer.

If we do not continue to improve our products and develop new products that keep pace with competitive product introductions and technological developments, satisfy diverse and rapidly evolving customer

requirements, and achieve market acceptance, we might be unable to attract new customers. Our industry is characterized by rapid and substantial developments in the technologies and products that enjoy widespread acceptance among prospective and existing customers. The development of proprietary technology and necessary service enhancements entails significant technical and business risks and requires substantial expenditures and lead-time. In addition, if our international development partners fail to provide the development support we need, our products and product documentation could fall behind those produced by our competitors, causing us to lose customers and sales. We might not be successful in marketing and supporting our products or developing and marketing other product enhancements and new products that respond to technological advances and market changes, on a timely or cost-effective basis. In addition, even if these products are developed and released, they might not achieve market acceptance. We have experienced delays in releasing new products and product enhancements in the past and could experience similar delays in the future. These delays or problems in the installation or implementation of our new releases could cause us to lose customers.

Our failure to manage multiple technologies and technological change could reduce demand for our products.

Rapidly changing technology and operating systems, changes in customer requirements, and evolving industry standards might impede market acceptance of our products. Our products are designed based upon currently prevailing technology to work on a variety of hardware and software platforms used by our customers. However, our software may not operate correctly on evolving versions of hardware and software platforms, programming languages, database environments and other systems that our customers use. If new technologies emerge that are incompatible with our products, or if competing products emerge that are based on new technologies or new industry standards and that perform better or cost less than our products, our key products could become obsolete and our existing and potential customers could seek alternatives to our products. We must constantly modify and improve our products to keep pace with changes made to these platforms and to database systems and other back-office applications and Internet-related applications. Furthermore, software adapters are necessary to integrate our products with other systems and data sources used by our customers. We must develop and update these adapters to reflect changes to these systems and data sources in order to maintain the functionality provided by our products. As a result, uncertainties related to the timing and nature of new product announcements, introductions or modifications by vendors of operating systems, databases, customer relationship managementCRM software, webWeb servers and other enterprise and Internet-based applications could delay our product development, increase our product development expense or cause customers to delay evaluation, purchase and deployment of our analytics products. Furthermore, if our international development partners fail to respond adequately when adaptation of our products is required, our ability to respond would be hampered even if such uncertainties were eliminated. If we fail to modify or improve our products in response to evolving industry standards, our products could rapidly become obsolete.

Our success depends upon our ability to develop new products and enhance our existing products on a timely basis.

The challenges of developing new products and enhancements require us to commit a substantial investment of resources to development, and we might not be able to develop or introduce new products on a timely or cost-effective basis, or at all, which could be exploited by our competitors and lead potential customers to choose alternative products. To be competitive, we must develop and introduce on a timely basis new products and product enhancements for companies with significant e-business customer interactions needs. Our ability to deliver competitive products may be negatively affected by the diversion of resources to development of our suite of products, and responding to changes in competitive products and in the demands of our customers. If we experience product delays in the future, we may face:

Furthermore, delays in bringing new products or enhancements to market can result, for example, from potential difficulties with managing outsourced research and development or from loss of institutional knowledge through reductions in force, or the existence of defects in new products or their enhancements.

Failure to license necessary third-party software incorporated in our products could cause delays or reductions in our sales.

We license third-party software that we incorporate into our products. These licenses may not continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Some of this technology would be difficult to replace. The loss of any of these licenses could result in delays or reductions of our applications until we identify, license and integrate, or develop equivalent software. If we are required to enter into license agreements with third parties for replacement technology, we could face higher royalty payments and our products may lose certain attributes or features. In the future, we might need to license other software to enhance our products and meet evolving customer needs. If we are unable to do this, we could experience reduced demand for our products.

Defects in third-party products associated with our products could impair our products’ functionality and injure our reputation.

The effective implementation of our products depends upon the successful operation of third-party products in conjunction with our products. Any undetected defects in these third-party products could prevent the implementation or impair the functionality of our products, delay new product introductions or injure our reputation.

Our independent registered public accounting firm hasWe have identified a material weaknessesweakness in our internal controlscontrol over financial reporting that, if not remediated, could affect our ability to prepare timely and accurate financial reports, which could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.

In connection with the course of the audit of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004, our former independent registered public accounting firm identified and reported material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which our internal controls do not reduce to a low level the risk that undetected misstatements caused by error or fraud may occur in amounts that are material to our audited consolidated financial statements. Soon thereafter, our former Chief Executive Officer and current Chief Financial Officer performed an evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures and found that they were not effective. First, we had weaknesses in our general accounting processes related to insufficient documentation and analyses to support our consolidated financial statements, failure to properly evaluate estimates of royalties due and insufficient staffing in the accounting and reporting function, which was exacerbated by changes in management and accounting personnel and insufficient training of our accounting department. Second, there was no independent review of journal entries, and insufficient documentation or support for journal entries and consolidation entries. In a number of cases, these required adjustments to our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2004. Furthermore, during the first quarter of 2005, our Audit Committee completed an examination of certain of our internal controls relating to travel and entertainment expenses and determined that we had made erroneous expense reimbursements to our former Chief Executive Officer and certain other executive officers, primarily as a result of inconsistent travel and entertainment policies, inadequate review of expense reimbursement requests and carelessness.

The material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting delayed the completion of our consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2005, as well as our financial statements for each of the quarters in 2005 and the first quarter of 2006, which prevented us from timely filing our Form 10-K for the each of the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2005 and our quarterly filings on Form 10-Q for all the quarters in 2005 and the first quarter of 2006. In particular, as a result of the lack of sufficient documentation and existing analysis to support the consolidated financial statements, significant analysis was required to support our consolidated financial statements, and the delay involved by the need for this analysis was exacerbated by insufficient staffing in our accounting and reporting function. This delay also impacted and continued to affect the our ability to timely file our periodic reports throughout 2005 and up to the first quarter of 2006, as we were not able to commence preparation of these reports until we had completed and filed the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, as we had not completed the remediation of these material weaknesses.

We have determined that the material weaknesses mentioned as of December 31, 2004, with the exception of the material weakness relating to travel and entertainment expenses, continued to exist during 2005 and through the third quarter of 2006. We believe that these material weaknesses mentioned above did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report due to the fact that the material weaknesses were remediated as of December 31, 2006 and that we performed substantial analyses on the prior period consolidated financial statement balances, including performing historical account reconciliations, having account balance analyses reviewed by senior management and reconstructing certain account balances. However, these material weaknesses mentioned above and our delay in timely completing our consolidated financial statements and thus, the filing of our periodic reports, increase the risk that a transaction will not be accounted for consistently and in accordance with established policy or generally accepted accounting principles, and increase the risk of error in our general accounting processes and consolidated financial statements.

Management, with the oversight of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors, has addressed these material weaknesses and has implemented controls to remediate these internal control weaknesses. Management believes that it has corrected the material weakness relating to travel and entertainment expense reimbursement by the end of the first quarter of 2005. New processes and internal controls have been approved and implemented and management has concluded that as of December 31, 2006, these controls are operating effectively.

During the 2006 year-end close, however,report, we identified and reported a material weakness in our internal controlcontrols over financialthe period-end reporting relatedprocess, including controls with respect to stock-based compensation. A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or a combinationthe review, supervision and monitoring of significant deficiencies, that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the financial statements will not be prevented or detected. This material weakness related to our failure to complete a proper analysis of historical stock option vesting data within our system. This resulted in a net overstatement of our stock-based compensation during the interim reporting periods of fiscal year 2006.accounting operations for both domestic and international operations. As a result of this material weakness, quarterly results of operations have been restated, as provided in Note 14 of the accompanying consolidated financial statements, prior period pro-forma informational disclosure of expenses have also been restated as provided in Note 7 of the accompanying consolidated financial statements, and the Company waswe are unable to conclude that our disclosure controls and procedures wereinternal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2006 (see Item 9A. “Controls and Procedures” in Part II).2007.

Management,Our management, with the oversight of the Audit Committee, of the Board of Directors, has begun to address this material weakness and is committed to effective remediation of these deficiencies as expeditiously as possible. We have implemented a procedureeffected personnel changes in our accounting and financial reporting functions. We will continue our efforts to establish or modify specific processes and controls to provide reasonable assurance with respect to the accuracy and integrity of accounting entries and account reconciliations and the appropriate review the stock option reports on a quarterly basis to assure that only current employee options that are expected to vest are included in the employee stock-based compensation expense for the period.and approval thereof. Our material weakness will not be considered remediated until new internal controls are developed and implemented throughout the Company,and are operational for a period of time and are tested,tested. In September 2007, we implemented a new enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system. We expect that the system will improve the reliability of our financial reporting by reducing the need for manual processes, subjective assumptions, and management concludes that thesediscretion; the opportunities for errors and omissions; and our reliance on manual controls are operating effectively.to detect and correct accounting and financial reporting inaccuracies. Our management will continue to review and make necessary changes to the overall design of our internal control environment, as well as policies and procedures to improve the overall effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.

Our remediation measures may not be successful in correcting the material weakness reported byrelated to our former and current independent registered public accounting firms.period-end reporting process. In addition, we cannot assure you that additional material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controlscontrol will not be discovered in the future. In addition, internal controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions and the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Any failure to remediate the material weaknessesweakness described above or to implement and maintain

effective internal controlscontrol over financial reporting could harm our operating results, delay our completion of our consolidated financial statements and our independent registered public accounting firm’s audit or review of our consolidated financial statements which could cause us to fail to timely meet our periodic reporting obligations with the SEC, or result in material misstatements in our consolidated financial statements which could also cause us to fail to timely meet our periodic reporting obligations with the SEC. Deficiencies in our internal controlscontrol over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.

We face additional risks and costs as a result of the delayed filing of our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, June 30, and September 30, 2005, and March 31, 2006, and our Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2005.

As a result of missing an established deadline with the NASDAQ Qualifications Panel for filing our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, we have experienced additional risks and costs. The March 31, 2005 10-Q was filed on October 11, 2005, past the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel’s established deadline of October 7, 2005; thus, the NASDAQ Listing Qualifications Panel delisted the Company’s common stock effective as of the beginning of trading on October 17, 2005. Since our common stock was delisted from The NASDAQ Stock Market, the ability of our stockholders to sell our common stock has been severely limited, causing our stock price to decline.

As a result of our delayed filings, we will be ineligible to register our securities on Form S-3 for sale by us or resale by others until we have timely filed all periodic reports under the Exchange Act for one year. Instead, the Company may be required to use Form S-1 to raise capital or complete acquisitions, which would increase transaction costs and adversely affect our ability to raise capital or complete acquisitions of other companies during this period.

Our common stock was delisted from The NASDAQ National Market and is currently quoted on the OTCBB.

Our common stock was delisted from The NASDAQ NationalGlobal Market (formerly known as the NASDAQ Stock Market) effective at the opening of business on October 17, 2005. From October 17, 2005 to December 4, 2006, our common stock was quoted on the “Pink Sheets” and as of December 5, 2006, our common stock has been quoted on Over the Counter Bulletin Board (“OTCBB”). The OTCBB is generally considered less efficient than The NASDAQ Global Market. Quotation of our common stock on the OTCBB will likelymay reduce the liquidity of our securities, could causelimit the number of investors not towho trade in our securities, result in a lower stock price and larger spread in the bid and ask prices for shares of our common stock and could have an adverse effect on the Company.us. Additionally, we may become subject to the SEC rules that affect “penny stocks,” which are stocks below $5.00 per share that are not quoted on The NASDAQ StockGlobal Market. These SEC rules would make it more difficult for brokers to find buyers for our securities and could lower the net sales prices that our stockholders are able to obtain. If our price of common stock remains low, we may not be able to raise equity capital.

Our listing on the OTCBB or further declines in our stock price may greatly impair our ability to raise additional necessary capital through equity or debt financing, and significantly increase the dilution to our current stockholders caused by any issuance of equity in financing or other transactions. The price at which we would issue shares in such transactions is generally based on the market price of our common stock and a decline in the stock price could result in our need to issue a greater number of shares to raise a given amount of funding.

In addition, because our common stock is not listed on a principal national exchange, we are subject to Rule 15g-9 under the Exchange Act, which imposes additional sales practice requirements on broker-dealers that sell low-priced securities to persons other than established customers and institutional accredited investors. For transactions covered by this rule, a broker-dealer must make a special suitability determination for the purchaser and have received the purchaser’s written consent to the transaction prior to sale. Consequently, the rule may affect the ability of broker-dealers to sell our common stock and affect the ability of holders to sell their shares of our common stock in the secondary market. Moreover, investors may be less interested in purchasing low-priced securities because the brokerage commissions, as a percentage of the total transaction value, tend to be higher for such securities, and some investment funds will not invest in low-priced securities (other than those which focus on small-capitalization companies or low-priced securities).

Our stock price has been highly volatile and has experienced a significant decline, and may continue to be volatile and decline.

The trading price of our common stock has fluctuated widely in the past and we expect that it will continue to do so in the future, as a result of a number of factors, many of which are outside our control, such as:

In addition, stock markets in general have, and particularly The NASDAQ StockGlobal Market hasand the OTCBB have, experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected the market prices of many technology and computer software companies, particularly Internet-related companies. Such fluctuations have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. These broad market fluctuations could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against that company. Securities class action litigation could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

Since becoming a publicly traded security listed on The NASDAQ NationalGlobal Market in September 1999, our common stock has reached a sales price high of $1,698.10 per share and a sales price low of $0.65 per share. On October 17, 2005, our common stock was delisted from The NASDAQ NationalGlobal Market due to the failure to timely file our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 with the SEC. Our common stock is currently quoted on the OTCBB. The last reported sale price of our shares on February 28, 200729, 2008 was $3.46$1.42 per share.

Our pending patents may never be issued and, even if issued, may provide little protection.

Our success and ability to compete depend upon the protection of our software and other proprietary technology rights. We currently have six issued U.S. patents, four of which expire in 2018 and two of which expire in 2020, and multiple U.S. patent applications pending relating to our software. None of our technology is patented outside of the United States. It is possible that:

We rely upon trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets to protect our proprietary rights, which may not be sufficient to protect our intellectual property.

In addition to patents, we rely on a combination of laws, such as copyright, trademark and trade secret laws, and contractual restrictions, such as confidentiality agreements and licenses, to establish and protect our proprietary rights. However, despite the precautions that we have taken:

Also, the laws of some other countries in which we market our products may offer little or no effective protection of our proprietary technology. Consequently, we may be unable to prevent our proprietary technology

from being exploited abroad, which could diminish international sales or require costly efforts to protect our technology. Reverse engineering, unauthorized copying or other misappropriation of our proprietary technology could enable third parties to benefit from our technology without paying us for it, which would significantly harm our business.

We may become involved in litigation over proprietary rights, which could be costly and time consuming.

The software industry is characterized by the existence of a large number of patents, trademarks and copyrights and by frequent litigation based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights, and our technologies may not be able to withstand any third-party claims or rights against their use. Some of our competitors in the market for customer communications software may have filed or may intend to file patent applications covering aspects of their technology that they may claim our technology infringes. Such competitors could make a claim of infringement against us with respect to our products and technology. Additionally, third parties may currently have, or may eventually be issued, patents upon which our current or future products or technology infringe and any of these third parties might make a claim of infringement against us. For example, we have recently beenwere involved in litigation brought by Polaris IP, LLC against us and certain of our customers that claimed that certain of our products violatesviolate patents held by them.

As we grow, the possibility of intellectual property rights claims against us increases. We may not be able to withstand any third-party claims and regardless of the merits of the claim, any intellectual property claims could be inherently uncertain, time-consuming and expensive to litigate or settle. Many of our software license agreements require us to indemnify our customers from any claim or finding of intellectual property infringement. We periodically receive notices from customers regarding patent license inquiries they have received which may or may not implicate our indemnity obligations. Any litigation, brought by others, or us could result in the expenditure of significant financial resources and the diversion of management’s time and efforts. In addition, litigation in which we are accused of infringement might cause product shipment delays, require us to develop alternative technology or require us to enter into royalty or license agreements, which might not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. If aan infringement claim of infringement wasis made against us, and we may not be able to develop non-infringing technology or license the infringedinfringing or similar technology on a timely and cost-effective basis,basis. As a result, our business could be significantly harmed.

We may face liability claims that could result in unexpected costs and damages to our reputation.

Our licenses with customers generally contain provisions designed to limit our exposure to potential product liability claims, such as disclaimers of warranties and limitations on liability for special, consequential and incidental damages. In addition, our license agreements generally limit the amounts recoverable for damages to the amounts paid by the licensee to us for the product or service giving rise to the damages. However, some domestic and international jurisdictions may not enforce these contractual limitations on liability. We may be subject to claims based on errors in our software or mistakes in performing our services including claims relating to damages to our customers’ internal systems. A product liability claim could divert the attention of our management and key personnel, could be expensive to defend and could result in adverse settlements and judgments.

We may face higher costs and lost sales if our software contains errors.

We face the possibility of higher costs as a result of the complexity of our products and the potential for undetected errors. Due to the critical nature of many of our products and services, errors could be particularly problematic. In the past, we have discovered software errors in some of our products after their introduction. We only have only a few “beta” customers that test new features and functionality of our software before we make these features and functionalities generally available to our customers. If we are not able to detect and correct errors in our products or releases before commencing commercial shipments, we could face:

Any of the foregoing potential results of errors in our software could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our security could be breached, which could damage our reputation and deter customers from using our services.

We must protect our computer systems and network from physical break-ins, security breaches, and other disruptive problems caused by the Internet or other users. Computer break-ins could jeopardize the security of information stored in and transmitted through our computer systems and network, which could adversely affect our ability to retain or attract customers, damage our reputation, and subject us to litigation. We have been in the past, and could be in the future, subject to denial of service, vandalism, and other attacks on our systems by Internet hackers. Although we intend to continue to implement security technology and establish operational procedures to prevent break-ins, damage and failures, these security measures may fail. Our insurance coverage in certain circumstances may be insufficient to cover losses that may result from such events.

We have significant international sales and are subject to risks associated with operating in international markets.

A substantial proportion of our revenues are generated from sales outside North America, exposing us to additional financial and operational risks. Sales outside North America represented 25%, 32% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2006, compared toand 30% of our total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2005.2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. We have established offices in the United States, Europe Japan, and Hong Kong.Japan. Sales outside North America could increase as a percentage of total revenues as we attempt to expand our international operations. In addition to the additional costs and uncertainties of being subject to international laws and regulations, international operations require significant management attention and financial resources, as well as additional support personnel. To the extent our international operations grow, we will also need to, among other things, expand our international sales channel management and support organizations and develop relationships with international service providers and additional distributors and systemsystems integrators. International operations are subject to many inherent risks, including:

We believe that international sales will continue to represent a significant portion of our revenue for the foreseeable future. Any of these factors may adversely affect our future international sales and, consequently, affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may suffer foreign exchange rate losses.

Our international revenues and expenses are denominated in local currency. Therefore, a weakening of other currencies compared to the U.S. dollar to other currencies could make our products less competitivemore costly to sell in foreign markets and could negatively affect our operating results and cash flows. We have not yet experienced, but may in the future experience, significant foreign currency transaction losses, especially because we generally do not engage in currency hedging. To the extent the international component of our revenues grows, our results of operations will become more sensitive to foreign exchange rate fluctuations.

If we acquire companies, products, or technologies, we may face risks associated with those acquisitions.

WeIn June 2007, we acquired Hipbone, Inc. in early 2004, and if we are presented with appropriate opportunities, we may make other investments in complementary companies, products, or technologies.all of the membership interests of eVergance. We may not realize the anticipated benefits of the eVergance acquisition or any other acquisition or investment. For example, since our inception, the Company haswe have recorded $2.7 billion of impairment charges for the cost of goodwill obtained from acquisitions. If we acquire another company, we will likely face risks, uncertainties and disruptions associated with the integration process, including, among other things, difficulties in the integration of the operations, technologies and services of the acquired company, the diversion of our management’s attention from other business concerns, the potential loss of key employees of the acquired businesses, and the failure of the acquired businesses, products or technologies to generate sufficient revenue to offset acquisition costs. If we fail to successfully integrate other companies that we may acquire, our business could be harmed. Also, acquisitions, including the acquisition of eVergance, can expose us to liabilities and risks facing the company we acquire, includingsuch as lawsuits or claims against the companyus that are unknown at the time of the acquisition. Furthermore, we may have to incur debt or issue equity securities to pay for any additional future acquisitions or investments, the issuance of which could be dilutive to our existing stockholders. In addition, our operating results may suffer because of acquisition-related costs or amortization expenses or charges relating to acquired goodwill and other intangible assets. These factors could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

Compliance with regulations governing public company corporate governance and reporting will result in additional costs.

Our continuing preparation for and implementation of various corporate governance reforms and enhanced disclosure laws and regulations adopted in recent years requires us to incur significant additional accounting and legal costs. We like other non-accelerated public companies, are preparing for newsubject to accounting disclosures required by laws and regulations adopted in connection with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”). In particular, we will be preparingare required to provide if required, beginning with our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2007, an Annual Reporta report on our internal control over financial reporting and an auditors’ attestation with respect to our reportinternal control over financial reporting required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Any unanticipated difficulties in preparing for and implementing these and other corporate governance and reporting reforms could result in material delays in compliance or significantly increase our costs. Also, there can be no assurance that we will be able to fully comply with these new laws and regulations. Any failure to timely prepare for and implement the reforms required by these new laws and regulations could significantly harm our business, operating results and financial condition.

We have adopted anti-takeover defenses that could delay or prevent an acquisition of the Company.

Our Board of Directors has the authority to issue up to 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock. Without any further vote or action on the part of the stockholders, the Board of Directors has the authority to determine the price, rights, preferences, privileges, and restrictions of the preferred stock. This preferred stock, if issued, might have preference over and harm the rights of the holders of common stock. Although the ability to issue this preferred stock provides us with flexibility in connection with possible acquisitions and other corporate purposes, it can also be used to make it more difficult for a third party to acquire a majority of our outstanding voting stock. We currently have no plans to issue preferred stock. Similarly, we have established a stockholder rights plan that is intended to protect our ability to utilize our net operating losses and which would also make it difficult for a third party to acquire a significant number of shares of our common stock.

Our certificate of incorporation, bylaws and equity compensation plans include provisions that may deter an unsolicited offer to purchase us. These provisions, coupled with the provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, may delay or impede a merger, tender offer or proxy contest. Furthermore, our Board of Directors is divided into three classes, only one of which is elected each year. In addition, directors are only removable by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all classes of voting stock. These factors may further delay or prevent a change of control of us.

Risks Related to Our Industry

Future regulation of the Internet may slow our growth, resulting in decreased demand for our products and services and increased costs of doing business.

State, federal and foreign regulators could adopt laws and regulations that impose additional burdens on companies that conduct business online. These laws and regulations could discourage communication by e-mail or other web-based communications, particularly targeted e-mail of the type facilitated by our products, which could reduce demand for our products and services.

The growth and development of the market for online services may prompt calls for more stringent consumer protection laws or laws that may inhibit the use of Internet-based communications or the information contained in these communications. The adoption of any additional laws or regulations may decrease the expansion of the Internet. A decline in the growth of the Internet, particularly as it relates to online communication, could decrease demand for our products and services and increase our costs of doing business, or otherwise harm our business. Any new legislation or regulations, application of laws and regulations from jurisdictions whose laws do not currently apply to our business, or application of existing laws and regulations to the Internet and other online services could increase our costs and harm our growth.

The imposition of sales and other taxes on products sold by our customers over the Internet could have a negative effect on online commerce and the demand for our products and services.

The imposition of new sales or other taxes could limit the growth of Internet commerce generally and, as a result, the demand for our products and services. Federal legislation that limits the imposition of state and local taxes on Internet-related sales will expire on November 1, 2007.2014. Congress may choose to modify this legislation or to allow it to expire, in which case state and local governments would be free to impose taxes on electronically purchased goods. We believe that most companies that sell products over the Internet do not currently collect sales or other taxes on shipments of their products into states or foreign countries where they are not physically present. However, one or more states or foreign countries may seek to impose sales or other tax collection obligations on out-of-jurisdiction companies that engage in e-commerce within their jurisdiction. A successful assertion by one or more states or foreign countries that companies that engage in e-commerce within their jurisdiction should collect sales or other taxes on the sale of their products over the Internet, even though not physically in the state or country, could indirectly reduce demand for our products.

Privacy concerns relating to the Internet are increasing, which could result in legislation that negatively affects our business in reduced sales of our products.

Businesses using our products capture information regarding their customers when those customers contact them on-line with customer service inquiries. Privacy concerns could cause visitors to resist providing the personal data necessary to allow our customers to use our software products most effectively. More importantly, even the perception of privacy concerns, whether or not valid, may indirectly inhibit market acceptance of our products. In addition, legislative or regulatory requirements may heighten these concerns if businesses must notify Websitewebsite users that the data captured after visiting certain Websiteswebsites may be used by marketing entities to unilaterally direct product promotion and advertising to that user. If consumer privacy concerns are not adequately resolved, our business could be harmed. Government regulation that limits our customers’ use of this information could reduce the demand for our products. A number of jurisdictions have adopted, or are considering adopting, laws that restrict the use of customer information from Internet applications. The European Union has required that its member states adopt legislation that imposes restrictions on the collection and use of personal data, and that limits the transfer of personally identifiable data to countries that do not impose equivalent restrictions. In the United States, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act was enacted in October 1998. This legislation directs the Federal Trade Commission to regulate the collection of data from children on commercial websites. In addition, the Federal Trade Commission has investigated the privacy practices of businesses that collect information on the Internet. These and other privacy-related initiatives could reduce demand for some of the Internet applications with which our products operate, and could restrict the use of these products in some e-commerce applications. This could, in turn, reduce demand for these products.

The success of our products depends on the continued growth and acceptance of the Internet as a business and communications tool, and the related expansion of the Internet infrastructure.

The future success of our products depends upon the continued and widespread adoption of the Internet as a primary medium for commerce, communication and business applications. Our business growth would be impeded if the performance or perception of the Internet was harmed by security problems such as “viruses,” “worms” and other malicious programs, reliability issues arising from outages and damage to Internet infrastructure, delays in development or adoption of new standards and protocols to handle increased demands of Internet activity, increased costs, decreased accessibility and quality of service, or increased government regulation and taxation of Internet activity.

The Internet has experienced, and is expected to continue to experience, significant user and traffic growth, which has, at times, caused user frustration with slow access and download times. If Internet activity grows faster than Internet infrastructure or if the Internet infrastructure is otherwise unable to support the demands placed on it, our business growth may be adversely affected.

General economic conditions could adversely affect our customers’ ability or willingness to purchase our products, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

Our customers consist of large and small companies in nearly all industry sectors and geographies. Potential new clients or existing clients could defer purchases of our products because of unfavorable macroeconomic conditions, such as rising interest rates, fluctuations in currency exchange rates, industry or national economic downturns, industry purchasing patterns, and other factors. Our ability to grow revenues may be adversely affected by unfavorable economic conditions.

ITEM 1B.

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.

Not applicable.

Our corporate headquarters are located in Menlo Park, California, where we lease approximately 45,000 square feet under a lease that expires in April 2010. In addition, we lease offices in several cities throughout the United States and internationally in the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Germany, JapanIreland and Hong Kong.Japan. We believe the facilities we are now using are adequate and suitable for our business requirements.

We have a total of approximately 39,460 square feet of excess space available for sublease or renegotiation. The excess space is located in Menlo Park, California and Princeton, New Jersey. Remaining lease commitment terms on these leases vary from less than one to four years. We are seeking to sublease or renegotiate the obligations associated with the excess space.

On January 24, 2007, RightNow Technologies, Inc. (“RightNow”) filed a suit in the Eighteenth Judicial District Court of Gallatin County, Montana against the Company and four former RightNow employees who had joined the Company. The suit alleges violation of certain provisions of employment agreements, misappropriation of trade secrets, as well as other claims, and seeks damages. We believe we have meritorious defenses to these claims and intend to defend against this action vigorously.

On March 16, 2006, Polaris IP, LLC (“Polaris”) filed suit against the Company, Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc., Priceline.com, Capital One, Continental Airlines, Inc., and E*Trade Financial, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,411,947 and 6,278,996, and seeking injunctive relief, damages and attorneys fees. In exchange for payment of a quarterly license fee through 2011, Polaris granted the Company a perpetual license to certain patents, including those at issue in the litigation, and the parties agreed to dismiss their claims against each other with prejudice. The terms of the settlement included the release and dismissal of the Company’s customers named in the lawsuit.

The underwriters for ourthe Company’s initial public offering, Goldman Sachs & Co., Lehman Bros., Hambrecht & Quist LLC, and Wit Soundview Capital Corp., as well as the Company and certain current and former officers of the Company were named as defendants in federal securities class action lawsuits filed in the U. S.U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.York (the “District Court”). The cases allege violations of various securities laws by more than 300 issuers of stock, including the Company, and the underwriters for such issuers, on behalf of a class of plaintiffs who, in the case of the Company, purchased the Company’s common stock between September 21, 1999 and December 6, 2000 in connection with ourthe Company’s initial public offering. Specifically, the complaints allege that the underwriter defendants engaged in a scheme concerning sales of the Company’s and other issuers’ securities in the initial public offering and in the aftermarket. In July 2003, we decided to join in a settlement negotiated by representatives of a coalition of issuers named as defendants in this action and their insurers. In April 2005, the court requested a modification to the original settlement arrangement which was approved by us. Although we believebelieved that the plaintiffs’ claims havehad no merit, we havehad decided to accept the settlement proposal to avoid the cost and distraction of continued litigation. BecauseThe Company was a party to a global settlement with the plaintiffs that would have disposed of all claims against it with no admission of wrongdoing by the Company or any of its present or former officers or directors. The settlement agreement had been preliminarily approved by the District Court. However, while the settlement will be funded entirely by the Company’s insurers, we do not believe that the settlement will have any effect on our financial condition, results of operation or cash flows. The proposed settlement agreement is subject towas awaiting final approval by the court. ShouldDistrict Court, in December 2006, the court failCourt of Appeals reversed the District Court’s determination that six focus cases could be certified as class actions. In April 2007, the Court of Appeals denied the plaintiffs’ petition for rehearing, but acknowledged that the District Court might certify a more limited class. At a June 26, 2007 status conference, the District Court approved a stipulation withdrawing the proposed settlement. On August 14, 2007, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in the six focus cases to approvetest the settlement agreement, wesufficiency of their class allegations. On September 27, 2007, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification in the six focus cases. The class certification motion is not expected to be resolved until after April 2008. On November 13, 2007, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, which the District Court has yet to rule on. We believe we have meritorious defenses to these claims and willintend to defend against thethis action vigorously. In addition, in October 2007, a lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington by Ms. Vanessa Simmonds against certain of the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering. The plaintiff alleges that the underwriters violated Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. section 78p(b), by engaging in short-swing trades, and seeks disgorgement of profits from the underwriters in amounts to be proven at trial. The suit names the Company as a nominal defendant, contains no claims against the Company, and seeks no relief from the Company.

On March 16, 2006, Polaris IP, LLC filed a suit against the Company, Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc., Priceline.com, Capital One, Continental Airlines, Inc. and E*Trade Financial in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,411,947 and 6,278,996 and seeking injunctive relief, damages and attorneys’ fees. On March 23, 2007, the parties entered into a settlement agreement and this matter was dismissed with prejudice on April 26, 2007.

Other third parties have from time to time claimed, and others may claim in the future that we have infringed their past, current or future intellectual property rights. We have in the past been forced to litigate such claims. These claims, whether meritorious or not, could be time-consuming, result in costly litigation, require expensive changes in our methods of doing business or could require us to enter into costly royalty or licensing agreements, if available. As a result, these claims could harm our business.

The ultimate outcome of any litigation is uncertain, and either unfavorable or favorable outcomes could have a material negative impact on our results of operations, consolidated balance sheets and cash flows due to defense costs, diversion ofand divert management resources and other factors.

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the year ended December 31, 2006.

The names of our current executive officers and certain biographical information about each (including their ages as of February 28, 2007) are set forth below:

Michael S. Fields.Mr. Fields joined our Board of Directors in June 2005 and since July 2005, has been serving as our Chairman of the Board of Directors. From July 2005 to August 2005, Mr. Fields served as acting President of KANA. In August, 2005, Mr. Fields was appointed Chief Executive Officer of KANA. Mr. Fields has been the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of The Fields Group, a venture capital and management consulting firm, since May 1997. In June 1992, Mr. Fields founded OpenVision Technologies, Inc., a supplier of computer systems management applications for open client/server computing environments, and served as its Chief Executive Officer from July 1992 to July 1995 and its Chairman of the Board of Directors from July 1992 to April 1997. Prior to these positions, Mr. Fields managed sales organizations at Oracle U.S.A., Inc., where he served as President, Applied Data Research and Burroughs Corporation. Mr. Fields also serves on the Board of Directors of Imation Corporation and two privately-held companies, ViaNovus, Inc. and Crucian Global Services, Inc.

John M. Thompson. Mr. Thompson joined KANA in October 2004 and currently serves as our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. From January 2003 to October 2004, Mr. Thompson was Chief Financial Officer of Veraz Networks, Inc., a provider of Voice Over IP solutions to the telecom industry. From May 2001 to January 2003, Mr. Thompson was Chief Financial Officer of Interwise, Inc., a provider of web-based communication products. From December 1998 to January 2001, Mr. Thompson was Chief Financial Officer of Manage.com, a software company. Mr. Thompson holds B.S. degrees in Mathematics and Industrial Management from Purdue University and a M.S. degree in Industrial Administration from Carnegie-Mellon University.

Jay A. Jones. Mr. Jones joined KANA in September 2006 and currently serves as our Chief Administrative Officer. Mr. Jones served as Senior Vice President, Chief Information Officer of VERITAS Software Corporation, an enterprise storage and performance company, from September 2004 to July 2005. From January 1999 to September 2004, Mr. Jones served as Chief Administrative Officer of VERITAS Software Corporation, and from March 1993 to January 1999, Mr. Jones served as Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary of VERITAS Software Corporation and OpenVision Technologies, Inc., a systems management software company which was acquired by VERITAS Software Corporation. Prior to OpenVision Technologies, Inc., Mr. Jones was senior corporate counsel for Oracle Corporation. Mr. Jones holds a B.S. degree in architecture from Howard University, a M.S. degree in City Planning from University of California at Berkeley and a J.D. degree from University of California at Berkeley. Mr. Jones is also a member of the California Bar.

William Rowe. Mr. Rowe joined KANA in January 2006 and currently serves as our Senior Vice President, Global Sales and Service. From May 2004 to January 2006, Mr. Rowe served as Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Global Card Services, a credit card middleware solutions and services company. From July 2002 to February 2004, Mr. Rowe held various sales and marketing positions with Winvista Corporation, a software and network management tools company. From November 1997 to June 2001, Mr. Rowe was a sales director with BearingPoint, Inc (formerly KPMG Consulting LLC), an accounting firm. Mr. Rowe holds a B.A. degree in Business from Trinity University.

William A. Bose. Mr. Bose joined KANA in September 1999 as corporate counsel and since August 2006 currently serves as our Vice President and General Counsel. From May 2005 to August 2006, Mr. Bose served as our General Counsel. Prior to September 1999, Mr. Bose held the position of attorney at Robert Half International, Inc. Mr. Bose holds a B.A. degree from University of California at Santa Barbara and a J.D. degree from Santa Clara University School of Law. Mr. Bose is also a member of the California Bar.Not applicable.

PART II

Our common stock is currently quoted on the OTCBB under the symbol “KANA.OB”. Prior to October 17, 2005, our common stock was listed on The NASDAQ NationalGlobal Market. Our common stock traded on the “Pink Sheets” from the beginning of trading on October 17, 2005 to the close of trading on December 4, 2006. As of the beginning of trading on December 5, 2006, our common stock has been trading on the OTCBB. The table below sets forth the high and low sales prices for our common stock as reported on The NASDAQ National Market and the high and low bid information for our common stock as reported on the “Pink Sheets” and the OTCBB, as applicable, for the periods indicated:indicated.

Holders of Record

There were approximately 1,140777 stockholders of record of our common stock as of February 28, 2007.29, 2008. The actual number of stockholders is greater than this number of record holders, and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers and other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include stockholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

Dividend Policy

We have not paid any cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain any earnings to fund the development and growth of our business and, therefore, do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. In addition, our existing credit facilities prohibit the payment of cash or stock dividends on our capital stock without the lender’s prior written consent.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

InOn June 2005,14, 2007 (the “Closing Date”), we agreed to issue to the Company completed a private placementformer members of unregistered securities for the issuanceeVergance an aggregate of 1,631,541600,000 shares of our common stock (the “Stock”) and warrantsan aggregate of 400,000 non-equity plan options to purchase 815,769 shares of our common stock to NightWatch Capital Partners, LP, NightWatch Capital Partners II, LP(the “Options”). Twenty-five percent of the Stock was issued as of the Closing Date and RHP Master Fund Ltd. (collectively,it was agreed that an additional twenty-five percent would be issued three, seven and nine months after the “Investors”) for gross proceedsClosing Date. The fair value of approximately $2.4 million.

In September 2005, the Company completedStock was determined using a private placementvalue of unregistered securities for$3.17, which was the issuanceaverage closing price of 2,626,912 shares ofour common stock two days before and warrantsafter the announcement date of May 7, 2007, less a 10% discount to purchase 945,687 shares ofreflect that unregistered stock was issued and issuable. The unissued stock is accounted for as common stock tosubscription on the Investors for gross proceeds of approximately $4.0 million. The warrants initially had an exercise price of $2.284 per share. These warrants became exercisable on March 28, 2006, and expire on September 29, 2010.

The termsconsolidated balance sheet. Twenty-five percent of the September 2005 private placement required additional sharesOptions were exercisable as of common stockthe Closing Date and warrants to be issued in the event the Company’s stockit was delisted from The NASDAQ National Market. In October 2005, the Company’s common stock was delisted from The NASDAQ National Market and the Company issuedagreed that an additional 425,358 shares of common stocktwenty-five percent would

be exercisable three, six and warrants to purchase 153,130 shares of common stock tonine months after the Investors for no proceeds. These additional warrantsClosing Date. The Options have an exercise price of $1.966 per share and became exercisable on April 24, 2006, and will expire on October 25, 2010.

In May 2006, the Company amended the Registration Agreement relatedequal to the June and September 2005 private placements (collectively referred to as “Private Placements”) to extend the deadline to register the sharesclosing sale price of our common stock on June 13, 2007, which was $3.07 as quoted on the OTCBB. The fair value of the Options was determined using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, using assumptions of a risk-free interest rate of 4.76%, expected volatility of 53%, the ten-year contractual term, and underlying sharesno expected dividends. The fair value of the common stock underlying the Options was discounted as discussed above. See Note 2 of the warrants issued“Notes to the Investors to September 30, 2006 from January 27, 2006,Consolidated Financial Statements” included in exchangeItem 8 of Part II of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the issuance of 593,854 shares of common stock to the Investors.

In October 2006, the Company issued to the Investors an aggregate of 59,383 shares of common stock since the Company was unable to meet its September 30, 2006 deadline to register the shares of common stock and underlying shares of common stock of the warrants issued to the Private Placements.

For the above-mentioned issuances of common stock and warrants to the Investors, the Company reliedmore information on an exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Rule 506 promulgated thereunder.

In November 2006, the Company registered the shares of common stock and underlying shares of common stock of the warrants issued to the Investors on a Form S-1 Registration Statement filed with the SEC.this acquisition.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

Information regarding the securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans can be found under Item 12 of Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Stock Performance Graph

The line graph below compares the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock with the cumulative return of the NASDAQ Composite Index and the Standard & Poor’s Information Technology Index (“S&P Information Technology Index”) for the five years ended December 31, 2006.2007. The graph and table assume that $100.00 was invested on December 28, 2001 (the last day of trading for the year ended December 31, 2001)2002 in each of our common stock, the NASDAQ Composite Index and the S&P Information Technology Index and that all dividends were reinvested. We have not paid or declared any cash dividends on our common stock. Stockholder returns over the period indicated should not be considered indicative of future stockholder returns.

COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*

Among KANAKana Software, Inc., The NASDAQ Composite Index

And The S & P Information Technology Index

* $ 100.00 invested on December 31, 2002 in stock or index-including reinvestment of dividends. Fiscal years ending December 31.

Notwithstanding any statement to the contrary in any of our previous or future filings with the SEC, the foregoing information relating to the price performance of our common stock shall not be deemed to be “filed” with the SEC or to be “soliciting material” under the Exchange Act, and it shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any of our filings under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent we specifically incorporate it by reference into such filing.

ITEM 6.

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The selected consolidated financial data set forth below should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” the consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and other information we have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.SEC.

The consolidated statements of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 2003, and 20022003 and the consolidated balance sheet data at December 31, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 2003, and 20022003 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. The diluted net loss per share computation excludes shares of common stock issuable upon exercise or conversion of other securities, including outstanding warrants and options to purchase common stock and common stock subject to repurchase rights, because their effect would be antidilutive. See “Net Loss Per Share” in Note 1 of the “Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements” included in Item 8 of Part II of this Annual Report for a detailed explanation of the determination of the shares used to compute basic and diluted net loss per share. Historical results are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any future period.

		Year Ended December 31,
		2006				2005				2004				2003				2002
		(in thousands, except per share amounts)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
Revenues:
License fees		$	19,116			$	8,094			$	14,169			$	26,228			$	41,530
Services			34,914				35,034				34,731				34,778				37,560
Total revenues			54,030				43,128				48,900				61,006				79,090
Costs and Expenses:
Cost of license fees			2,460				2,995				2,449				3,125				3,402
Cost of services (1)			10,439				8,746				9,834				10,132				30,133
Amortization of acquired intangible assets			133				133				119				1,453				4,800
Sales and marketing (1)			19,616				17,682				25,745				31,489				42,120
Research and development (1)			10,765				13,232				19,579				23,586				30,317
General and administrative (1)			10,185				11,404				8,294				10,064				19,709
Impairment of internal-use software			—				6,326				1,062				—				—
Restructuring costs			703				468				3,400				1,704				(5,086	)
Goodwill impairment			—				—				—				—				55,000
Total costs and expenses			54,301				60,986				70,482				81,553				180,395
Loss from operations			(271	)			(17,858	)			(21,582	)			(20,547	)			(101,305	)
Impairment of investment			—				—				—				(500	)			—
Interest and other income (expense), net			(738	)			88				128				186				913
Registration rights penalty			(1,198	)			—				—				—				—
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes			(2,207	)			(17,770	)			(21,454	)			(20,861	)			(100,392	)
Income tax expense			(219	)			(196	)			(314	)			(318	)			—
Loss from continuing operations			(2,426	)			(17,966	)			(21,768	)			(21,179	)			(100,392	)
Discontinued operation:
Gain on disposal, including provision of $1.1 million for operating losses during phase-out period			—				—				—				—				381
Cumulative effect of accounting change related to the elimination of negative goodwill			—				—				—				—				3,901
Net loss		$	(2,426	)		$	(17,966	)		$	(21,768	)		$	(21,179	)		$	(96,110	)
Basic and diluted net loss per share:
Loss from continuing operations		$	(0.07	)		$	(0.58	)		$	(0.75	)		$	(0.88	)		$	(4.48	)
Income from discontinued operation			—				—				—				—				0.02
Gain on elimination of negative goodwill			—				—				—				—				0.17
Net loss		$	(0.07	)		$	(0.58	)		$	(0.75	)		$	(0.88	)		$	(4.29	)
Shares used in computing basic and diluted net loss per share			34,584				30,814				28,950				24,031				22,403
		December 31,
		2006				2005				2004				2003				2002
		(in thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	5,719			$	6,216			$	13,772			$	16,282			$	19,112
Marketable securities			—				—				6,361				16,674				13,386
Working capital (deficit)			(11,044	)			(18,439	)			(9,657	)			4,168				(4,533	)
Total assets			30,335				35,706				50,361				69,878				80,550
Total long-term debt			242				—				—				—				—
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			(3,132	)			(9,794	)			3,164				21,532				21,952
(1)    Includes employee stock-based compensation expense, which was allocated as follows:

		December 31,
		2007				2006				2005				2004				2003
		(in thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents		$	4,306			$	5,719			$	6,216			$	13,772			$	16,282
Marketable securities			—				—				—				6,361				16,674
Working capital (deficit)			(11,621	)			(11,044	)			(18,439	)			(9,657	)			4,168
Total assets			35,400				30,335				35,706				50,361				69,878
Total long-term debt			72				242				—				—				—
Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)			4,406				(3,132	)			(9,794	)			3,164				21,532

In addition to historical information, this report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.Act. The forward-looking statements are not historical facts but rather are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about our business and industry, and our beliefs and assumptions. Words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expects,“expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “will” and variations of these words and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could cause actual results to differ materially from” those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those described in Item 1A “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. Forward-looking statements that were believed to be true at the time made may ultimately prove to be incorrect or false. We undertake no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements. Given these risks and uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.

Overview

KANA offersWe offer an innovative approach to customer service with cost-effective solutions that enhance the quality of multi-channel customer interaction.interactions. Built on open standards for a high degree of adaptability and integration, KANAour solutions intelligently automate the processes needed to successfully serve our clients’ customers, so that our clients can deliver higher value service at lower cost. KANA providescost, increasing customer retention and loyalty. We provide an integrated solution which enables organizations to deliver consistent, managed service across all channels, including email,e-mail, chat, call centers and Web self-service, ensuring a consistent service experience across communication channels.

Our revenue is primarily derived from the sale of our software and related maintenance and support of the software. To a lesser extent, weWe also derive revenues from consulting, training and training.other services. Our products are generally installed by our customers using either a systems integrator, such as IBM or Accenture or BearingPoint. KANA’sour professional services group. Our professional services group assists the integrators as subject matter experts and in some cases

will act as the prime contractor for implementation of our software. To a large degree,In June 2007 we acquired eVergance which expanded our professional services group’s capabilities and resources. We also rely on our relationship with IBM and other systems integrators to recommend and install our software. This provides leverage in the selling phase, and also allows us to realize higher gross margins by selling primarily software licenses and support, which typically have higher margins than consulting and implementation services. In the past, the Companywe supplied specialists (who were subject matter experts) to work with IBM and other systems integrators. While the Company continueswe continue this practice, the Company iswe are increasingly providing consulting and implementation services directly to our customers. These services may be provided to our existing customers who would like the Companyus to review their implementations or to new customers who are not quite large enough to gain the interest of a large systemsystems integrator to provide such services. However, in the case of most of the initial installations of our applications that are generally installed by our customers using a systemsystems integrator, these services generally increase the cost of the project substantially by subjecting their purchase to more levels of required approvalapprovals and scrutiny of projected cost savings in their customer service and marketing departments. This contributes to the difficulty that we face in predicting the quarter in which sales to expected customers will occur and to the uncertainty of our future operating results. To the extent that significant sales occur earlier or later than anticipated, revenues for subsequent quarters may be lower or higher, respectively, than expected.

In the first quarter of 2005, we reduced our cost structure through the reduction of outsourced product development, a reduction in amortization related to the discontinuance of certain internal-use software, reduced headcount and other cost reduction programs. In late 2005, we made a decision to bring core technology development back to our personnel in the United States in a process that we refer to as “back-shoring” and by the end of the third quarter of 2006January 2007 we have brought back all core technology development to our personnel in the United States, except for one product group.States. We also plan to back-shoreback-shored our technical support. These adjustments have reduced our total cost of licenses, research and development, and general and administrative expenses infor 2007 and 2006. As we rebuilt the sales organization, sales and marketing expenseexpenses increased in 2007 and 2006 due to an increase in commissions as a result of higher revenues. From now on, we willDuring 2007, cost of services, sales and marketing, research and development and general and administrative expenses increased compared to 2006 primarily due to increased staffing to support the revenue growth and to build additional infrastructure. Cost of license fees decreased compared to 2006 due to lower third-party royalties. We strive to match our spending with the anticipated revenue, but given the unpredictability of our license revenue, we are unable to predict with any certainty the period(s) when the Companywe will be profitable, if at all.profitable.

Since 1997 weWe have incurred substantial costs to develop our products and to recruit, train and compensate personnel for our engineering, sales, marketing, client services and administration departments. As a result, we have incurred substantial losses since inception. On December 31, 2006, the Company2007, we had ending cash and cash equivalents of $5.7$4.3 million and no borrowings$1.2 million outstanding under our line of credit. As of December 31, 2006, the Company2007, we had an accumulated deficit of $4.3 billion and a negative working capital of $11.0$11.6 million. Losses from operations were $7.1 million and $0.3 million for 2007 and $17.9 million for 2006, and 2005, respectively, and net losses were $8.0 million and $2.4 million for 2007 and $18.0 million for 2006, and 2005, respectively. Net cash used for operating activities was $8.4 million and $1.7 million in 2007 and $16.3 million in 2006, and 2005, respectively.

We have taken steps to lower the expenses related to cost of revenues, sales and marketing, research and development, and general and administrative areas of the Company. We also successfully closed two private salesa direct offering of registered shares of our common stock on November 21, 2007 for approximately $2.4$8.9 million on June 30, 2005in net proceeds after deducting the placement agent’s fees and approximately $4.0 million on September 29, 2005. Managementoffering expenses. Our management believes that based on itsour current plans, its existing funds will be sufficient to meet the Company’sour working capital and capital expenditure requirements through December 31, 2007.2008. However, if we experience lower than anticipated demand for our products, we will need to further reduce costs, issue additional equity securities or borrow money to meet our cash requirements. Any such equity issuances could be dilutive to our stockholders, and any financing transactions may be on unfavorable terms, if at all.

As of December 31, 2006,2007, we had 181225 full-time employees, which representrepresents an increase from 181 employees at December 31, 2006 and an increase from 125 employees at December 31, 2005 and no change from 181 employees at December 31, 2004.2005.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions about future events that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. This forms the basis of judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. In some cases, changes in the accounting estimates are reasonably likely to occur from period to period. Accordingly, actual results could differ materially from our estimates.

We believe the following discussion addresses the Company’sour most critical accounting policies. These critical accounting policies which are those thatrequire management to make difficult, subjective, and complex judgments, and are most important to the portrayal of the Company’sour financial condition and results of operations and require management’s most difficult, subjective, and complex judgments. In addition, pleaseoperations. Please refer to Note 1 of the Notes“Notes to the Consolidated Financial StatementsStatements” in Item 8 for a further description of our critical accounting policies.

Revenue Recognition

We recognize revenues in accordance with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”) Statement of Position (“SOP”) 97-2, “Software Revenue Recognition” (“SOP 97-2”), as amended.

Revenue from software license agreements is recognized when the basic criteria of software revenue recognition have been met (i.e., persuasive evidence of an agreement exists, delivery of the product has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collection is probable). The Company uses the residual method described in AICPA SOP 98-9, “Modification of SOP 97-2, Software Revenue Recognition, With Respect to Certain Transactions” (“SOP 98-9”), to recognize revenue when a license agreement includes one or more elements to be delivered at a future date and vendor-specific objective evidence of the fair value of all undelivered elements exists. Under the residual method, the fair value of the undelivered elements is deferred and the remaining portion of the arrangement fee is recognized as license revenue. If evidence of the fair value of one or more undelivered elements does not exist, all revenue is deferred and recognized when delivery of those elements occurs or when fair value can be established.

For all sales we use either a signed license agreement, a signed amendment to an existing license agreement, a signed order form, a binding purchase order where we either have a signed master license agreement or an order form signed by the Company, or a signed statement of work as evidence of an arrangement.

Software delivery is primarily by electronic means. If the software or other deliverable is subject to acceptance for a specified period after the delivery, revenue is deferred until the acceptance period has expired or the acceptance provision has been met.

When licenses are sold together with consulting services, license fees are recognized upon delivery, provided that (1) the basic criteria of software revenue recognition have been met, (2) payment of the license fees is not dependent upon the performance of the consulting services, and (3) the consulting services do not provide significant customization of the software products and are not essential to the functionality of the software that was delivered. The Company doesWe do not provide significant customization of itsour software products.

Revenue arrangements with extended payment terms are generally considered not to be fixed or determinable, and the Companywe generally doesdo not recognize revenue on these arrangements until the customer payments become due and all other revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Probability of collection is based upon assessment of the customer’s financial condition through review of their current financial statements or publicly-available credit reports. For sales to existing customers, prior

payment history is also considered in assessing probability of collection. The Company isWe are required to exercise significant judgment in deciding whether collectibility is reasonably assured, and such judgments may materially affect the timing of our revenue recognition and our results of operations.

Services revenues include revenues for consulting services, customer support and training, and OnDemand hosting.Enterprise OnDemand. Consulting services revenues and the related cost of services are generally recognized on a time and materials basis. For consulting services contracts that have a fixed fee, we recognize the license and professional consulting services revenues using either the percentage-of-completion method or the completed contract method as prescribed by AICPA SOP No. 81-1, “Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and Certain Product-Type Contracts” (“SOP 81-1”). KANA’sOur consulting arrangements do not include significant customization of the software. Customer support agreements provide technical support and the right to unspecified future upgrades on an if-and-when available basis. Customer support revenues are recognized ratably over the term of the support period (generally one year). Training services revenues are recognized as the related training services are delivered. The unrecognized portion of amounts billed in advance of delivery for services is recorded as deferred revenue. Enterprise OnDemand includes our KANA On Demand ‘software as a service’ and outsourcing offerings as well as Advanced Customer Services. OnDemand revenue isrevenues are recognized in accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 104, “Revenue Recognition, corrected copy” (“SAB 104”). Revenues from Enterprise OnDemand services are recognized ratably over the term of the arrangement, while application fees are recognized ratably over the sum of the term of the arrangement and the term of expected renewals. Hosting service arrangements are a means of deployment whereby our customer’s software and data is physically located in third party facilities. Customers pay a fee to remotely access the hosted software and data via a secure internet connection. Hosting fees are recognized as the hosting service is delivered in accordance with SAB 104.

Vendor-specific objective evidence for consulting and training services are based on the price charged when an element is sold separately or, in the case of an element not yet sold separately, the price established by authorized management, if it is probable that the price, once established, will not change before market introduction. Vendor-specific objective evidence for support services is generally based on the price charged when an element is sold separately or the stated contractual renewal rates.

Accounting for Internal-Use Software

Internal-use software costs, including fees paid to third parties to implement the software, are capitalized beginning when we have determined various factors are present, including among others,such as that technology exists to achieve the performance requirements, we have made a decision as to whether we will purchase the software or develop it internally, and we have authorized funding for the project. Capitalization of software costs ceases when the software implementation is substantially complete and is ready for its intended use, and the capitalized costs are amortized over the software’s estimated useful life (generally five years) using the straight-line method.

When events or circumstances indicate the carrying value of internal useinternal-use software might not be recoverable, we assess the recoverability of these assets by determining whether the amortization of the asset balance over its remaining life can be recovered through undiscounted future operating cash flows. The amount of impairment, if any, is recognized to the extent that the carrying value exceeds the projected discounted future operating cash flows and is recognized as a write down of the asset. In addition, if it is no longer probable that the computer software being developed will be placed in service, the asset will beis adjusted to the lower of its carrying value or fair value, if any, less direct selling costs. Any such adjustment would result in an expense in the period recorded, which could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statements of operations. In the first quarter ended March 31, 2005, the Company’sour information technology department reviewed itsour operations and technology requirements, and decided to discontinue itsthe use of certain internal useinternal-use software, which resulted in a non-cash impairment charge of $6.3 million.

As of December 31, 2006,2007, we had $561,000$824,000 of capitalized costs for internal useinternal-use software less $523,000$561,000 of accumulated amortization for a net balance of $38,000.$263,000.

Restructuring

During 2001, we recorded significant liabilities in connection with our restructuring program. These reserves included estimates pertaining to contractual obligations related to excess leased facilities in Menlo Park,

California; Princeton, New Jersey; Framingham, Massachusetts; and Marlow in the United Kingdom. Remaining lease commitments will terminate over various dates beginning in April 2007 throughJanuary 2010 and January 2011. We are seeking to sublease or renegotiate the obligations associated with the excess space. We have subleased some of the excess space, but in all cases, the sublease income is less than the rent we pay the landlord. We had $6.1$2.8 million in accrued restructuring costs as of December 31, 2006,2007, which was our estimate, as of that date, of the exit costs of these excess facilities. We have worked with real estate brokers in each of the markets where thethese properties are located to help us estimate the amount of the accrual. This process involves significant judgments regarding these markets. If we determine that any of these real estate markets has deteriorated further, additional adjustments to this accrual may be required, which would result in additional restructuring expenses in the period in which such determination is made. Likewise, if any of these real estate markets strengthen, and we are able to sublease the properties earlier or at more favorable rates than projected, or if we are otherwise able to negotiate early termination of obligations on favorable terms, adjustments to the accrual may be required that would increase income in the period in which such determination is made. As of December 31, 2006, our estimate of accrued restructuring cost included an assumption that we would receive $861,000 in sublease payments that are not subject to any contractual arrangement as of December 31, 2006. We have assumed that the majority of these assumed sublease payments will begin in 2007 and continue through the end of the related leases. In December 2006, we determined that we may not be able to sublease a leased

facility in Princeton, New Jersey, and we changed our assumption of subleasing this excess space. We recorded a restructuring charge of $739,000 as of December 31, 2006 mainly related to this change in estimate of sublease assumption that iswas not subject to any contractual arrangement. In 2006, there was also a restructuring recovery of $36,000 due to the change in estimates of termination of certain employees. As of December 31, 2007, our estimate of accrued restructuring cost included an assumption that we would receive $722,000 in sublease payments that were not subject to any contractual arrangement. We have assumed that the majority of these assumed sublease payments will begin in 2008 and continue through the end of the related leases. Lease obligations for Framingham, Massachusetts and Marlow in the United Kingdom terminated during 2007.

In July 2007, we implemented various cost reduction and restructuring activities to reduce operating costs. The expense related to our reduction in work force was approximately $240,000 and the expense related to ceasing use of one of our offices was approximately $8,000.

In September 2007, we agreed with the landlord of one of the facilities included in our restructuring accrual to surrender the remaining term of the lease in exchange for a lump sum cash payment. As a result of this agreement we recorded an additional restructuring expense of approximately $319,000. The lump sum cash payment was primarily made by a surrender of the existing lease deposit of $2.1 million.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets

We regularly evaluate all potential indicators of impairment of goodwill and intangible assets, but at a minimum, test goodwill and intangible assets for impairment on an annual basis. Our judgments regarding the existence of impairment indicators are based on market conditions and operational performance. Future events could cause us to conclude that impairment indicators exist and that goodwill and other intangible assets associated with our acquired businesses are impaired.

The remaining amount of goodwill as of December 31, 20062007 is $8.6$12.5 million. We continue to assess whether any potential indicators of impairment of goodwill have occurred and have determined that no such indicators have arisen since June 30, 2006,2007, the date of our annual goodwill impairment test. Any further impairment loss could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Income Taxes

We estimate our income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we operate as part of the process of preparing our consolidated financial statements. This process involves us estimating our actual current tax exposure together with assessing temporary differences resulting from differing treatment of items, such as net operating loss carryforwards, and stock-based compensation, for tax and accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities. We then assess the likelihood that our net deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income and to the extent we believe that recovery is not more likely than not, we establish a valuation allowance. We concluded that a full valuation allowance was required for all periods

presented. While we have considered future taxable income in assessing the need for the valuation allowance, in the event we were to determine that we would be able to realize our deferred tax assets in the future in excess of its net recorded amount, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would be made, increasing our income in the period in which such determination was made.

Pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, the amounts of and benefits from net operating loss carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that we may utilize include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50% ownership of the company,Company, as defined, over a three yearthree-year period. The portion of the net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards subject to potential expirationlimitation has not been included in deferred tax assets.

On January 1, 2007, we adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48 “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes — an interpretation of FASB Statement 109” (“FIN 48”). FIN 48 establishes a single model to address accounting for uncertain tax positions. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for income taxes by prescribing a minimum recognition threshold a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. During the implementation, we identified, evaluated, and measured the amount of income tax benefits to be recognized for all material income tax positions. The net deferred income tax assets recognized under FIN 48 did not materially differ from the net deferred tax assets recognized before adoption, and, therefore, we did not record an adjustment related to the adoption of FIN 48. At the adoption date of January 1, 2007, we had $145,000 of unrecognized tax benefits, all of which would affect our effective tax rate if recognized. At December 31, 2007, we had $145,000 of unrecognized tax benefits.

Contingencies and Litigation

We are subject to lawsuits and other claims and proceedings. We assess the likelihood of any adverse judgments or outcomes to these matters as well as ranges of probable losses. A determination of the amount of loss contingency required, if any, for these matters are made after careful analysis of each individual matter. The required loss contingencies may change in the future as the facts and circumstances of each matter changes.

Stock Based Compensation

On January 1, 2006, we adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS 123(R)”), which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation expense for all stock-based awards made to employees and directors including employee stock options and employee stock purchases under the Employee Stock Purchase Plan based on estimated fair values. SFAS 123(R) supersedes our previous accounting under Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (“APB 25”) for periodsyears beginning in fiscal year 2006. In March 2005, the SEC issued Staff Accounting BulletinSAB No. 107, “Share-Based Payment” (“SAB No. 107”), providing supplemental implementation guidance for SFAS 123(R). We have applied the provisions of SAB 107 in our adoption of SFAS 123(R).

SFAS 123(R) requires companies to estimate the fair value of employee stock-based awards on the date of grant using an option pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense over the requisite service periods in our consolidated statements of operations. We adopted SFAS 123(R) using the modified prospective transition method which requires the application of the accounting standard starting from January 1, 2006, the first day of our fiscal year 2006. Our consolidated financial statements as of and for the yearyears ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R). Employee stock-based compensation expense for each of the yearyears ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $2.8 million which consisted of stock-based compensation expense related to employee stock options recognized under SFAS 123(R).million.

Prior to the adoption of SFAS 123(R), we accounted for stock-based awards to employees and directors using the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB 25 as allowed under SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (“SFAS 123”). Under the intrinsic value method, no stock-based compensation

expense for employee stock options had been recognized in our consolidated statements of operations, because the exercise price of our stock options granted to employees and directors equaled to the quoted market price of the underlying stock at the date of grant. In accordance with the modified prospective transition method we used in adopting SFAS 123(R), our results of operations prior to fiscal year 2006 have not been restated to reflect, and dodid not include, the possible impact of SFAS 123(R).

Stock-based compensation expense recognized during a period is based on the value of the portion of stock-based awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Stock-based compensation expense recognized in the yearyears ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 included compensation expense for stock-based awards granted prior to, but not yet vested as of, December 31, 2005, based on the fair value on the grant date estimated in accordance with the pro forma provisions of SFAS 123. As new grants occur, ourOur stock-based compensation expense will also includeincludes compensation expense for the share-based payment awards granted subsequent to December 31, 2005 based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123(R). As stock-based compensation expense recognized in our results of operations for 2007 and 2006 iswas based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has beenwas reduced for estimated forfeitures. SFAS 123(R) requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. Prior to fiscal year 2006, we accounted for forfeitures as they occurred for the purposes of pro forma information under SFAS 123, as disclosed in our notes to the consolidated financial statements for the related periods.

Upon adoption of SFAS 123(R), we selected the Black-Scholes option pricing model as the most appropriate method for determining the estimated fair value for stock-based awards. The Black-Scholes model requires the use of highly subjective and complex assumptions which determine the fair value of stock-based awards, including the option’s expected term and the price volatility of the underlying stock.

For stock options granted to non-employees, the Company recognizeswe recognize compensation expense in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123 and Emerging Issues Task Force Issue (“EITF”) No. 96-18, “Accounting for Equity Instruments that are Issued to Other than Employees for Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services”,Services,” which require such equity instruments to be recorded at their fair value on the measurement date. The measurement of stock-based compensation is subject to periodic adjustment as the underlying equity instruments vest. The Company amortizesWe amortize compensation expense related to non-employee stock options in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 28,“Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock Option or Award Plans” (“FIN 28”). The CompanyWe extended the vesting period of approximately 1,000,000

stock options held by four terminated employees who had agreements to provide consulting services. In October 2006, the Companywe extended the exercise period of approximately 211,000 vested stock options of a former employee as the result of a termination agreement. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Companywe granted a total of 57,500 stock options to four non-employees who had agreements to provide consulting services. As a result of these stock option modifications to former employees and the stock option grants to consultants, the Companywe recorded non-employee stock-based compensation expense of $31,000 and $632,000 for the yearyears ended December 31, 2006.2007 and 2006, respectively.

Also see “Stock-Based Compensation” in Item 8, Note 1 of the Notes“Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.”

Effect of Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements” (“SFAS 160”). SFAS 160 amends Accounting Research Bulletin 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements”, to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. It requires the recognition of a non-controlling interest (minority interest) as equity in the consolidated financial statements and separate from the parent’s equity, and it eliminates “minority interest” accounting in results of operations with earnings attributable to non-controlling interests reported as part of consolidated earnings. SFAS 160 also establishes reporting requirements that provide sufficient disclosures that clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the interests of

the non-controlling owners. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal periods, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning on or after December 15, 2008. We are currently evaluating the impact the adoption of SFAS 160 will have on our financial position and results of operations.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS 141R”). SFAS 141R establishes principles and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, any non-controlling interest in the acquiree and the goodwill acquired. SFAS 141R also establishes disclosure requirements to enable the evaluation of the nature and financial effects of the business combination. SFAS 141R is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2008, and will be adopted by us in the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. SFAS 141R is to be applied prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after January 1, 2009. We expect SFAS 141R will have an impact on our accounting for future business combinations once adopted but the effect is dependent upon the acquisitions that are made in the future.

In February 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting StandardsSFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” (“SFAS 159”). SFAS159SFAS 159 provides companies with an option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The standard requires companies to provide additional information that will help investors and other users of financial statements to more easily understand the effect of thea company’s choice to use fair value on its earnings. It also requires entities to display the fair value of those assets and liabilities for which thea company has chosen to use fair value on the face of the balance sheet. This StatementSFAS 159 is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year beginning after November 15, 2007. Early adoption is permitted as of the beginning of the previous fiscal year provided that the entity makes that choice in the first 120 days of that fiscal year and also elects to apply the provisions of Statement 157. The Company isSFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS 157”). We are currently evaluating whether the adoption of SFAS 159 will have a material effect on itsour financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In December 2006, the FASB issued FSP Emerging Issues Task ForceFASB Staff Position EITF 00-19-2, “Accounting for Registration Payment Arrangements.” This FSPArrangements” (“EITF 00-19-2”). EITF 00-19-2 specifies that the contingent obligation to make future payments or otherwise transfer consideration under a registration payment arrangement, whether issued as a separate agreement or included as a provision of a financial instrument or other agreement, should be separately recognized and measured in accordance with FASB Statement No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies.”Contingencies”. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of implementing this new standard.

In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, “Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements” (“SAB 108”). The purpose of SAB 108 is to provide guidance on the consideration of the effects of prior year misstatements in quantifying current year misstatements for the purposes of a materiality assessment. The guidance is effective for financial statements for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006. SAB 108 was effective for the Company as of December 31, 2006. The adoption of SAB 108EITF 00-19-2 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, “Employer’s Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans-an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106 and 132R” (“SFAS 158”). SFAS 158 requires an entity to recognize in its statement of financial position an asset for a defined benefit postretirement plan’s over funded status or a liability for a plan’s under funded status. The requirement to recognize the funded status of a defined postretirement plan and the disclosure requirements are effective for fiscal years ending after December 31, 2006. The Company does not expect the adoption of SFAS 158 to have a material impact on itsour financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS 157”). The purpose of SFAS No. 157 is to define fair value, establish a framework for measuring fair value and enhance disclosures about fair value measurements. The measurement and disclosure requirements are effective for the Companyus beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2008. The Company isWe are currently evaluating the effects of implementing SFAS 157.

In June 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No.FIN 48. FIN 48 “Accountingestablishes a single model to address accounting for Uncertain Tax Positions – An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (“FIN 48”).uncertain tax positions. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with FASB Statement No. 109 “Accounting for Income Taxes”. It prescribesby prescribing a minimum recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expectedis required to be takenmeet before being recognized in a tax return.the financial statements. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, measurement classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. We adopted FIN 48 is effectiveon January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN 48, we did not recognize any increase or decrease in the liability for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of implementing FIN 48.unrecognized tax benefits.

In March 2006, the FASB issued EITF 06-3, “How Sales Taxes Collected From Customers and Remitted to Governmental Authorities Should Be Presented in the Income Statement” (“EITF 06-3”),. A tentative consensus was reached that a company should disclose its accounting policy (i.e., gross or net presentation) regarding presentation of taxes within the scope of EITF 06-3. If taxes are significant, a company should disclose the amount of such taxes for each period for which an income statement is presented. The guidance is effective for periodsfiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The Company presents salesWe present revenues net of sales taxes in itsour consolidated statements of operations and doesdo not anticipate changing itsour policy as a result of EITF 06-3.

In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, “Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets—an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140” (“SFAS 156”), which is effective for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2006. This statement was issued to simplify the accounting for servicing rights and to reduce the volatility that results from using different measurement attributes. The Company does not expect the adoption of SFAS 156 to have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments,” (“SFAS 155”) an amendment of FASB Statements No. 133 and 140. SFAS 155 will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of 2007. SFAS 155 permits interests in hybrid financial instruments that contain an embedded derivative that would otherwise require bifurcation, to be accounted for as a single financial instrument at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized in earnings. This election is permitted on an instrument-by-instrument basis for all hybrid financial instruments held, obtained, or issued as of the adoption date. The Company does not expect the adoption of SFAS 155 to have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth selected data for the periods presented. Percentages are expressed as a percentage of total revenues.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2007 and 2006

Revenues

Total revenues increased by 13% to $60.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from $54.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily as a result of higher services revenues in 2007 compared to 2006.

License revenues include licensing fees only and exclude associated support and consulting revenues. The majority of our licenses to customers are perpetual and associated revenues are recognized upon delivery provided that all revenue recognition criteria are met as discussed in “Revenue Recognition” under “Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” above. License revenues decreased by 5% to $18.1 million for 2007 from $19.1 million for 2006. This decrease in license revenues was based, in part, on additional levels of approvals inside our customers’ organizations that resulted in longer sales cycles brought on as a result of macro economic conditions. While we are focused on increasing license revenues, we are unable to predict such revenues from period to period with any degree of accuracy because, among other things, the market for our products is unpredictable and intensely competitive, and our sales cycle is long and unpredictable.

Services revenues consist of support revenues and professional services revenues and fees. Support revenues relate to providing customer support, product maintenance and updates to our customers. Professional services

revenues relate to providing consulting, training and implementation services to our customers including Enterprise OnDemand. Services revenues increased by 22% to $42.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $34.9 million for 2006. Support revenues are the largest component of services revenues, and in 2007, support revenues increased because there was greater focus on support renewals by a team dedicated to renewals that was not employed by us in 2006. The other part of services revenues is professional services fees that increased in 2007 from 2006 primarily due to five large long-term consulting projects in 2007 and the additional services fees generated by eVergance.

Revenues from international sales were $15.3 million, or 25% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2007 and $17.1 million, or 32% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2006. Our international revenues were derived from sales in Europe and Asia Pacific.

Costs and Expenses

Total cost of revenues increased by 35% to $17.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from $13.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006.

License Fees. Cost of license fees consists primarily of third party software royalties and costs of product documentation. Cost of license fees as a percentage of license revenue was 7% in 2007 compared to 13% in 2006. The decrease was primarily due to lower third party royalty costs. We expect that our cost of license fees as a percentage of sales will vary based on changes in the mix of products we sell and the timing of upgrades. We are not able to predict when customers will choose to upgrade their software which will then cause us to incur royalty costs. We are continuing to look at cost-effective alternatives for some original equipment manufacturer (“OEM”) products embedded in our products.

Services. Cost of services consists primarily of salaries and related expenses for our customer support, consulting, and training services organization, and allocation of facility costs and system costs incurred in providing customer support and Enterprise OnDemand. Cost of services increased to 37% of services revenues, or $16.0 million, for 2007 compared to 30% of services revenues, or $10.4 million, for 2006. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $336,000 and $211,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively. The decrease in service margins in 2007 compared to 2006 was due to an increase in consulting costs as we built up the service organization to support increased revenues. As of December 31, 2007, we had 68 employees in support and consulting, 25 of which were a result of the acquisition of eVergance, compared to 48 employees as of December 31, 2006, a 42% increase.

Cost of services may increase or decrease, depending on the demand for these services. The expenses may also be affected by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Amortization of Acquired Intangible Assets.The amortization of acquired intangible assets recorded in 2007 was related to $2.5 million of intangible assets recorded in connection with the acquisition of eVergance in June 2007. The amortization of acquired intangible assets recorded in 2006 was related to $400,000 of intangible assets recorded in connection with the acquisition of Hipbone, Inc. in February 2004. Amortization totaled $288,000 and $133,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

Sales and Marketing. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for sales and marketing personnel and promotional expenditures, including public relations, advertising, trade shows and marketing materials. Sales and marketing expenses increased by 29% to $25.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from $19.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $854,000 and $752,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase in expenses was primarily attributable to an increase in average sales personnel of 24% from an average in 2006 of 37 employees to an average of 46 employees during 2007 and an increase in marketing programs.

Sales and marketing expenses may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues and our assessment of market opportunities and sales channels. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Research and Development. Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for research and development employees and contractors and enhancement of existing products and quality assurance activities. Research and development expenses increased by 18% to $12.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from $10.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $359,000 and $356,000 for 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase in expenses was primarily attributable to increased employee headcount partially offset by a reduced number of contractors. As of December 31, 2007, we had 53 employees in research and development compared to 37 employees as of December 31, 2006, a 43% increase.

Research and development expenses including related headcount may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues, customer needs, and our assessment of market demand. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for finance, legal, human resources, corporate governance, and bad debt expense. Information technology and facilities costs are allocated among all operating departments. General and administrative expenses increased by 17% to $11.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007 from $10.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $1.3 million and $1.5 million for years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase in expenses was primarily due to an increase in average personnel of 17% from an average in 2006 of 30 employees to an average of 35 employees during 2007. Additionally, we incurred approximately $362,000 of expense related to outside Sarbanes-Oxley consultants. As of December 31, 2007, we had 41 employees in general and administrative and information technology compared to 31 employees as of December 31, 2006, a 32% increase.

General and administrative expenses may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues and corporate infrastructure requirements including insurance, professional services, taxes, bad debt expense, and other administrative costs. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Restructuring Costs. In December 2006, we determined that we may not be able to sublease a leased facility in Princeton, New Jersey, and changed our assumption of subleasing this excess space. During the year ended December 31, 2006, we recorded $739,000 of restructuring costs mainly related to this change in estimate of sublease payment that was not subject to any contractual arrangement. In 2006, there was also a restructuring recovery of $36,000 due to the change in estimates of termination of certain employees.

In July 2007, we implemented various cost reduction and restructuring activities to reduce operating costs. The expense related to our reduction in work force was approximately $240,000 and expense related to ceasing use of one of our offices was approximately $8,000.

In September 2007, we agreed with the landlord of one of the facilities included in our restructuring accrual to surrender the remaining term of the lease in exchange for a lump sum cash payment. As a result of this agreement, we recorded additional restructuring expense of approximately $319,000. The lump sum cash payment was primarily made by surrender of the existing lease deposit of $2.1 million.

The following table summarizes our restructuring activities for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 (in thousands):

The remainder of the restructuring payments will be paid relatively evenly from 2008 through 2011.

Goodwill Impairment.During June 2007, we performed our annual test for goodwill impairment as required by SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” (“SFAS 142”). Based on our evaluation, we concluded that goodwill was not impaired as the fair value of the Company exceeded its carrying value, including goodwill. There have been no events or circumstances from June 30, 2007 to December 31, 2007 that have affected our June 30, 2007 conclusion regarding the recoverability of goodwill. The remaining amount of goodwill at December 31, 2007 was $12.5 million. Any further impairment loss could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Interest and Other Income (Expense), Net

Interest and other income (expense), net consists primarily of interest income, interest expense and changes in fair value of warrant liabilities. Interest income consists primarily of interest earned on cash and cash equivalents and was approximately $87,000 and $172,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The decrease in interest income related to lower cash and cash equivalents balances in 2007 compared to 2006. Interest expense relates primarily to our line of credit and was approximately $858,000 and $207,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The increase in interest expense related to increased borrowings against the line of credit in 2007 compared to 2006. Interest and other income (expense), net also consists of $383,000 of bank fees for the year ended December 31, 2007 and an increase in the fair value of warrant liabilities of approximately $774,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Registration Rights Penalty

In June 2005, we completed a private placement of unregistered securities for the issuance of 1,631,541 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 815,769 shares of common stock to NightWatch Capital Partners, LP, NightWatch Capital Partners II, LP and RHP Master Fund Ltd. (collectively, the “Investors”) for gross proceeds of approximately $2.4 million.

In September 2005, we completed a private placement of unregistered securities for the issuance of 2,626,912 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 945,687 shares of common stock to the Investors for gross proceeds of approximately $4.0 million. These warrants became exercisable on March 28, 2006, and will expire on September 29, 2010.

In May 2006, we amended the registration agreement related to the June and September 2005 private placements (collectively referred to as “Private Placements”) to extend the registration deadline of the shares of common stock and underlying shares of common stock of the warrants issued to the Investors to September 30,

2006 from January 27, 2006, in exchange for the issuance of 593,854 shares of common stock to the Investors. The shares were valued at approximately $1.0 million based on the fair market value of our stock on the date of the amendment less a 10% discount to reflect that unregistered stock was issued. $337,000 and $695,000 were recorded as non-operating expenses during the first and second quarter of 2006, respectively. The September 30, 2006 registration deadline was not met and an additional 59,383 shares of common stock was issued to the Investors. The shares were valued at approximately $166,000 based on the fair market value of our common stock on September 30, 2006 less a 10% discount to reflect that unregistered stock was issued. This amount was recorded as a non-operating expense during the third quarter of 2006. On November 9, 2006, we completed the registration of the shares of common stock and shares of common stock underlying the warrants issued to the Investors.

Income Tax Expense

We have incurred net operating losses on a consolidated basis for all years from inception through December 31, 2007. Accordingly, we have recorded a valuation allowance for the full amount of our gross deferred tax assets, as the future realization of the tax benefit is not currently more likely than not. In 2007 and 2006, certain of our foreign subsidiaries were profitable, based upon application of our intercompany transfer pricing agreements, which resulted in us reporting income tax expense in those foreign jurisdictions totaling approximately $167,000 and $219,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

As of December 31, 2007, we had operating loss carryforwards for federal and state income tax purposes of approximately $455 million and $344 million, respectively. The federal and state net operating loss carryforwards, if not offset against future taxable income, will expire by 2026. We also had foreign net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $8 million. The foreign losses expire at various dates and some can be carried forward indefinitely.

Pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, the amounts of and benefits from net operating loss carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that we may utilize in any one year include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50% of the Company, as defined, over a three-year period. As such, the portion of the net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards subject to potential limitation has not been included in deferred tax assets.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2006 and 2005

Revenues

Total revenues increased by 25% to $54.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily as a result of higher license revenues in 2006 than incompared to 2005.

License revenues include licensing fees only, and exclude associated support and consulting revenue. The majority of our licenses to customers are perpetual and associated revenues are recognized upon delivery provided that all revenue recognition criteria are met as discussed in “Revenue Recognition” under “Critical Accounting Policies”Policies and Estimates” above. License revenues increased by 136% to $19.1 million for 2006 from $8.1 million for 2005. This increase in license revenuerevenues was based, in part, on increased demand for our products, increased average transaction value and a significant add-on sale to an existing customer during the second quarter of 2006. While we are focused on increasing license revenue,revenues, we are unable to predict such revenuerevenues from period to period with any degree of accuracy because, among other things, the market for our products is unpredictable and intensely competitive, and our sales cycle is long and unpredictable.

Our serviceServices revenues consist of support revenues and professional services revenues and fees. Support revenues relate to providing customer support, product maintenance and updates to our customers. Professional services

revenues relate to providing consulting, training and implementation services to our customers, including OnDemand, software as a service option. Serviceour Enterprise OnDemand. Services revenues remained flat at $34.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $35.0 million for 2005. Support revenues are the largest component of serviceservices revenues, and in 2006, support revenues decreased because support revenues from new maintenance contracts associated with new license transactions did not offset support renewal cancellations. The other part of serviceservices revenues are professional services fees that increased in 2006 from 2005 mainly due to an increase in Enterprise OnDemand revenues. We expect that service revenues in 2007 will be fairly consistent with those from 2006 in absolute dollars.

Revenues from international sales were $17.1 million, or 32% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2006 and $13.1 million, or 30% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2005. Our international revenues were derived from sales in Europe and Asia Pacific.

Costs and Expenses

Total cost of revenues increased by 10% to $13.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 from $11.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.

License Fees. Cost of license fees consists primarily of third party software royalties and costs of product packaging, documentation, and production and delivery costs for shipments to customers.documentation. Cost of license fees as a percentage of license revenue was 13% in 2006 compared to 37% in 2005. The decrease was partially due to a reduction in royalty costs associated with a relatively lower proportion of non-revenue-related shipments, such as upgrades and updates, as we had a lower proportion of such shipments during 2006. In addition, we reduced our royalty costs by replacing certain third-party technology with a lower cost alternative. Therefore, even though license revenuerevenues increased by 136% from 2005 to 2006 there was no significant increase in cost of license fees from 2005 to 2006. We expect that our cost of license fees as a percentage of sales will vary based on changes in the mix of products we sell and the timing of upgrades. We are not able to predict when customers will choose to upgrade their software which will then cause us to incur this royalty cost. We are continuing to look at alternatives for some original equipment manufacturer (“OEM”)OEM products embedded in KANAour products.

Services. Cost of services consists primarily of salaries and related expenses for our customer support, consulting, and training services organization, and allocation of facility costs and system costs incurred in providing customer support. Cost of services increased to 30% of serviceservices revenues, or $10.4 million, for 2006 compared to 25% of serviceservices revenues, or $8.7 million, for 2005. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $211,000 and $2,000 for 2006 and 2005, respectively. The decrease in service margins in 2006 compared to 2005 was due to an increase in our strategy and professional service staffing levels throughout 2006 partially offset by the effect of a one-time $1.6 million services revenue recognized in 2005. As of December 31, 2006, we had 48 employees in support and consulting compared to 25 employees as of December 31, 2005, a 92% increase. Six additional people were added during the fourth quarter of 2006 and the increase in personnel reflected our replacement of certain consultants with employees as we transitioned to an internal support model during 2006.

Cost of services may increase or decrease, depending on the demand for these services. The expenses may also be affected by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Amortization of Acquired Intangible Assets.The amortization of acquired intangible assets recorded in 2006 and 2005 related to $400,000 of intangible assets recorded in connection with the acquisition of Hipbone, Inc. in February 2004. Amortization totaled $133,000 and $133,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

Sales and Marketing. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for sales and marketing personnel and promotional expenditures, including public relations, advertising, trade shows and marketing materials. Sales and marketing expenses increased by 11% to $19.6 million for the year ended

December 31, 2006 from $17.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. This was primarily due to increased commissions as a result of increased license revenuerevenues and increased spending for advertising and public relations. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $752,000 and $9,000 for 2006 and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, we had 65 employees in sales and marketing compared to 41 employees as of December 31, 2005, an increase of 59%. Sixteen people were added during the fourth quarter of 2006 as we strategically added sales and marketing personnel to increase our revenues.

Sales and marketing expenses may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues and our assessment of market opportunities and sales channels. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Research and Development. Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for research and development employees and contractors and enhancement of existing products and quality assurance activities. Research and development expenses decreased by 19% to $10.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 from $13.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. This decrease was attributable primarily to a reduction in outsourcing expenses as well as information technology and facilities allocated costs. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $356,000 and $2,000 for 2006 and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, we had 37 employees in research and development compared to 30 employees as of December 31, 2005, a 23% increase. Five people were added during the fourth quarter of 2006.

Research and development expenses including related headcount may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues, customer needs, and our assessment of market demand. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for finance, legal, human resources, corporate governance, and bad debt expense. Information technology and facilities costs are allocated among all operating departments. General and administrative expenses decreased by 11% to $10.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2006 from $11.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Both totals include employee stock-based compensation of $1.5 million and $25,000 for periodsyears ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The decrease in expenses during the year ended December 31, 2006 was primarily due to the reversal of the accrual of Texas state tax expense, lower auditing and legal fees, and a decrease in the use of outside consultants partially offset by an increase in employee stock-based compensation and a legal settlement charge. As of December 31, 2006, we had 31 employees in general and administrative and information technology combined compared to 29 employees as of December 31, 2005, a 7% increase.

General and administrative expenses may increase or decrease, depending primarily on the amount of future revenues and corporate infrastructure requirements including insurance, professional services, taxes, bad debt expense, and other administrative costs. The expenses may also be impacted by the amount, type and valuation of stock options granted as well as the amount of stock options cancelled due to employees and consultants leaving the Company.

Impairment of Internal UseInternal-Use Software. In the quarter ended March 31, 2005, the Companywe reviewed all continuing operating expenses across the entire Company, including our technology requirements. One result of this review was a decision to discontinue the use of certain internal useinternal-use software. The total non-cash impairment charge related to this software was $6.3 million in the first quarter of 2005.

Restructuring Costs. In December 2006, the Companywe determined that it may not be able to sublease a leased facility in Princeton, New Jersey, and changed its assumption of subleasing this excess space. During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Companywe recorded $739,000 of restructuring costs mainly related to this change in estimate of

sublease payment that iswas not subject to any contractual arrangement. In 2006, there was also a restructuring recovery of $36,000 due to the change in estimates of termination of certain employees.

In the fourth quarter of 2005, we recorded a restructuring charge of $271,000 for the termination of certain employees net of adjustments to restructured facilities.

In the third quarter of 2005, we made adjustments to the restructuring accrual of $189,000 to correct for certain calculation errors made in the fourth quarter of 2004. We believe that these errors are not material to our consolidated financial statements for 2005 or 2004.

In the second quarter of 2005, the assumptions as to when certain U.S. facilities would be subleased were revised, which increased the reserve by $1.0 million. This increase was offset by an additional $1.6 million in sublease income from the actual sublet of the Marlow, U.K. facility.

In the third quarter of 2005, the Company made adjustments to the restructuring accrual of $189,000 to correct for certain calculation errors made in the fourth quarter of 2004. The Company believes that these errors are not material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements for 2005 or 2004.

In the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company recorded a restructuring charge of $271,000 for the termination of certain employees net of adjustments to restructured facilities.

The following table summarizes our restructuring activityactivities for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 (in thousands):

The remainder of the restructuring payments will be paid relatively evenly from 2007 through 2011.

Goodwill Impairment.During June 2006, we performed our annual test for goodwill impairment as required by SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” (“SFAS 142”). Based on our evaluation, we concluded that goodwill was not impaired as the fair value of the Company exceeded its carrying value, including goodwill. There have been no events or circumstances from June 30, 2006 to December 31, 2006 that have affected our June 30, 2006 conclusion regarding the recoverability of goodwill. The remaining amount of goodwill at December 31, 2006 is $8.6 million. Any further impairment loss could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Interest and Other Income (Expense), net

Interest and other income (expense), net consists primarily of interest income, interest expense and changes in fair value of warrant liabilities. Interest income consists primarily of interest earned on cash and cash equivalents and was approximately $172,000 and $265,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The decrease in interest income related to lower cash and cash equivalents balances in 2006 than incompared to 2005. Interest expense relates primarily to our line of credit and was approximately $207,000 and $513,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The decrease in interest expense related to lower borrowings against the line of credit in 2006 than incompared to 2005. Interest and other income (expense), net also consists of an increase in the fair value of warrant liabilities of approximately $774,000 for the year ended December 31, 2006 and a decrease in the fair value of warrant liabilities of approximately $331,000 for the yearsyear ended December 31, 2005.

Registration Rights Penalty

In June 2005, we completed a private placement of unregistered securities for the issuance of 1,631,541 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 815,769 shares of common stock to NightWatch Capital Partners, LP, NightWatch Capital Partners II, LP and RHP Master Fund Ltd. (collectively, the “Investors”) for gross proceeds of approximately $2.4 million.

In September 2005, we completed a private placement of unregistered securities for the issuance of 2,626,912 shares of common stock and warrants to purchase 945,687 shares of common stock to the Investors for gross proceeds of approximately $4.0 million. These warrants became exercisable on March 28, 2006, and will expire on September 29, 2010.

In May 2006, the Companywe amended the Registration Agreementregistration agreement related to the June and September 2005 private placements (collectively referred to as “Private Placements”) to extend the registration deadline of the shares of common stock and underlying shares of common stock of the warrants issued to certain investors (the “Investors”)the Investors to September 30, 2006 from January 27, 2006, in exchange for the issuance of 593,854 shares of common stock to the Investors. The shares were valued at approximately $1.0 million based on the fair market value of the Company’sour stock on the date of the amendment less a 10% discount to reflect that unregistered stock was issued. $337,000 and $695,000 were recorded as non-operating expenses during the first and second quarter of 2006 respectively. The September 30, 2006 registration deadline was not met and an additional 59,383 shares of common stock was issued to the Investors. The shares were valued at approximately $166,000 based on the fair market value of the Company’sour common stock on September 30, 2006 less a 10% discount to reflect that unregistered stock was issued. This amount was recorded as a non-operating expense during the third quarter of 2006. On November 9, 2006, the Companywe completed the registration of the shares of common stock, and shares of common stock underlying the warrants, issued to the Investors.

Income Tax Expense

We have incurred net operating losses on a consolidated basis for all years from inception through December 31, 2006. Accordingly, we have recorded a valuation allowance for the full amount of our gross deferred tax assets, as the future realization of the tax benefit is not currently more likely than not. In 2006 and 2005, certain of our foreign subsidiaries were profitable, based upon application of our intercompany transfer pricing agreements, which resulted in us reporting income tax expense in those foreign jurisdictions totaling approximately $219,000 and $196,000 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, in those foreign jurisdictions.

As of December 31, 2006 the Company had operating loss carryforwards for federal and state income tax purposes of approximately $443.0 million and $333.6 million, respectively. The federal and state net operating loss carryforwards, if not offset against future taxable income, will expire by 2025. The Company also had foreign net operating loss carryforwards of approximately

$7.9 million. The foreign losses expire at various dates and some can be carried forward indefinitely. Pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, the amounts of and benefits from net operating loss carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that the Company may utilize in any one year include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50%, as defined, over a three year period. As such, the portion of the net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards subject to potential expiration has not been included in deferred tax assets. In addition, it is possible additional limitations may exist.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2005 and 2004

Revenues

Total revenues decreased by 12% to $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 from $48.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, primarily as a result of fewer license transactions in 2005 than in 2004. We believe the decrease in 2005 was due to many factors including competitive pressures, greater-than-anticipated delays in completing expected license transactions through systems integrators, and a slow recovery in the information technology spending environment.

License revenues include licensing fees only, and exclude associated support and consulting revenue. The majority of our licenses to customers are perpetual and associated revenues are recognized upon shipment provided that all revenue recognition criteria are met as discussed in “Revenue Recognition” under “Critical Accounting Policies” above. License revenues decreased by 43% to $8.1 million for 2005 from $14.2 million for 2004. This decrease in license revenue was primarily due to a decrease in the average selling price of license transactions due to competitive pricing pressures, as well as a decrease in the number of license transactions closed during the year. We expect our average selling price to continue to fluctuate in future quarters given the relatively low number of new transactions that comprise the majority of our license revenue recognized per quarter. The market for our products is unpredictable and intensely competitive, and the economic environment over the last few years has had an effect on corporate purchasing, which has adversely affected sales of our products.

Our service revenues consist of support revenues and professional services fees. Support revenues relate to providing customer support, product maintenance and updates to our customers (including when-and-if-available upgrades). Professional services revenues relate to providing consulting, training and, to a lesser extent, implementation services to our customers. Service revenues remained flat at $35.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $34.7 million for 2004. The consistency in service revenue amount was in line with expectations since the relatively small percentage of support renewal cancellations is typically more than offset by new maintenance contracts associated with new license transactions. Support revenues are the largest component of service revenues, and in 2005, were relatively consistent with our 2004 support revenues. The drop in sales of new licenses in 2005 affected service revenues less than license revenues because the majority of our support revenues relate to ongoing maintenance contracts with existing customers.

Revenues from international sales were $13.1 million, or 30% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2005 and $17.2 million, or 35% of total revenues, in the year ended December 31, 2004. Our international revenues were derived from sales in Europe and Asia Pacific.

Costs and Expenses

Total cost of revenues decreased by 4% to $11.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 from $12.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.

License Fees. Cost of license fees consists of third party software royalties, costs of product packaging, documentation, and production and delivery costs for shipments to customers. Cost of license fees as a percentage of license revenue for 2005 was 37% compared to 17% in 2004. The increase was due to royalty costs associated with a relatively higher proportion of non-revenue-related shipments, such as upgrades and updates during 2005, as well as a decrease in license fees.

Services. Cost of services consists primarily of salaries and related expenses for our customer support, consulting, and training services organization, and allocation of facility costs and system costs incurred in providing customer support. Cost of services decreased to 25% of service revenues, or $8.7 million, for 2005 compared to 28% of service revenues, or $9.8 million, for 2004. Both totals include amortization of stock-based compensation of $2,000 and $346,000 for periods ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The consistency in service margins in 2005 compared to 2004 was due to consistency in our strategy and professional service staffing levels throughout 2005 and 2004.

Amortization of Acquired Intangible Assets.The amortization of acquired intangible assets recorded in 2005 and 2004 related to $400,000 of intangible assets recorded in connection with the acquisition of Hipbone, Inc. in February 2004. Amortization totaled $133,000 and $119,000 for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Sales and Marketing. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for sales and marketing personnel and promotional expenditures, including public relations, advertising, trade shows and marketing materials. Sales and marketing expenses decreased by 31% to $17.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 from $25.7 million for the year ended

December 31, 2004. Both totals include amortization of stock-based compensation of $9,000 and $646,000 for periods ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. This decrease was partly attributable to reductions in sales and marketing personnel during 2005, from 70 positions at December 31, 2004 to 41 positions at December 31, 2005 and a reduction in information technology support.

Research and Development. Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for research and development employees and contractors and enhancement of existing products and quality assurance activities. Research and development expenses decreased by 32% to $13.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 from $19.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. Both totals include amortization of stock-based compensation of $2,000 and $82,000 for periods ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. This decrease was partly attributable to a reduction in research and development personnel during 2005 by 12%, from 34 employees at December 31, 2004 to 30 employees at December 31, 2005 and a reduction in information technology support. The decrease can also be attributed to lower outsourcing expenses paid to our development partners with staffing in India and China.

General and Administrative. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation and related costs for finance, legal, human resources, corporate governance, and bad debt expense. Information technology and facilities costs are allocated among all operating departments. General and administrative expenses increased by 37% to $11.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 from $8.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. Both totals include amortization of stock-based compensation of $25,000 and $157,000 for periods ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. This increase was primarily attributable to an increase in professional services and other general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2005, partially offset by a reduction of general and administrative personnel during 2005 by 16%, from 25 employees at December 31, 2004 to 21 employees at December 31, 2005.

Impairment of Internal Use Software. In quarter ended December 31, 2004, the Company’s IT department reviewed its operations and technology requirements, and decided to discontinue its use of certain internal use software. As a result, a material charge for impairment was required under SFAS No. 144,Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. The capitalized cost of this internal-use software included capitalized fees paid to third parties to implement the software. The total non-cash impairment charge related to this software was $1.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2004.

In the quarter ended March 31, 2005, the Company reviewed all continuing operating expenses across the entire Company, including our technology requirements. One result of this review was a decision to discontinue the use of certain internal use software. The total non-cash impairment charge related to this software was $6.3 million in the first quarter of 2005.

Restructuring Costs.During the preparation of the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Company discovered that errors had been made in the fourth quarter 2004 revaluation of the restructuring accrual calculation for unoccupied leased facilities. The Company increased the first quarter 2005 restructuring accrual by $938,000 to adjust for these errors. The Company believes that these errors are not material to the financial statements for 2004 or 2005.

In the second quarter of 2005, the assumptions as to when certain U.S. facilities would be subleased were revised, which increased the reserve by $1.0 million. This increase was offset by an additional $1.6 million in sublease income from the actual sublet of the Marlow U.K. facility.

In the third quarter of 2005, the Company made adjustments to the restructuring accrual of $189,000 to correct for certain calculation errors made in the fourth quarter of 2004. The Company believes that these errors are not material to the Company’s financial statements for 2004 or 2005.

In the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company recorded a restructuring charge of $271,000 for the termination of certain employees net of adjustments to restructured facilities.

During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company recorded $3.4 million in restructuring costs related to a change in evaluation of real estate market conditions in the United Kingdom, and changes in sublease estimates based on offers from potential subtenants in the United States.

The following table summarizes our restructuring activity for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 (in thousands):

The remainder of the restructuring payments will be paid relatively evenly from 2006 through 2011.

Goodwill Impairment.During June 2005, we performed our annual test for goodwill impairment as required by SFAS No. 142. Based on our evaluation, we concluded that goodwill was not impaired as the fair value of the Company exceeded its carrying value, including goodwill. There had been no events or circumstances from June 30, 2005 to December 31, 2005 that affected our June 30, 2005 conclusion regarding the recoverability of goodwill. The remaining amount of goodwill at December 31, 2005 was $8.6 million. Any further impairment loss could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Interest and Other Income (Expense), net

Interest and other income (expense), net consists primarily of interest income, interest expense and changes in fair value of warrant liabilities. Interest income consists primarily of interest earned on cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities and was approximately $265,000 and $294,000 for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The decrease in interest income related to lower cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities balances in 2005 than in 2004. Interest expense relates primarily to our line of credit and was approximately $513,000 and $180,000 for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Interest and other income (expense), net also consists of changes in the fair value of warrant liabilities of approximately $331,000 and zero for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Income Tax Expense

We have incurred net operating losses on a consolidated basis for all years from inception through December 31, 2005. Accordingly, we have recorded a valuation allowance for the full amount of our gross deferred tax assets, as the future realization of the tax benefit is not currently more likely than not. In 2005 and 2004, certain of our foreign subsidiaries were profitable, based upon application of our intercompany transfer pricing agreements, which resulted in us reporting income tax expense totaling approximately $196,000 and $314,000 for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, in those foreign jurisdictions.

Quarterly Results of Operations

The following tables set forth a summary of our unaudited quarterly operating results for each of the eight quarters in the period ended December 31, 2006.2007. The information has been derived from our unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements that, in management’s opinion, have been prepared on a basis consistent with the audited consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this Annual Report and include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of this information when read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any future period.