UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 
FORM 10-Q
 
   
þ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010
OR
   
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from                    to                    
Commission file number: 001-31783
 
RAE SYSTEMS INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
   
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
 77-0280662
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
   
3775 North First Street

San Jose, California
(Address of principal executive offices)
 
95134
(Zip Code)
408-952-8200
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
 
     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yesþ Noo
     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yeso Noo
     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
       
Large accelerated filero Accelerated filero Non-accelerated filerþSmaller reporting companyo
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting companyo
     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yeso Noþ
     Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
      
 
 Class  Outstanding at JulyOctober 31, 2010 
 Common stock, $0.001 par value per share  59,431,60159,506,243 shares 
 
 
 

 


 

RAE Systems Inc.
INDEX
       
    Page 

Part I. Financial Information
    
       
 Financial Statements (Unaudited)  3 
  Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009  3 
  Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009  4 
  Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009  5 
  Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements  6 
 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations  2021 
 Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk  2933 
 Controls and Procedures  3034 
       

Part II. Other Information
    
       
 Legal Proceedings  3135 
 Risk Factors  3236 
 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds  3843 
 Defaults Upon Senior Securities  3843 
 Reserved  3943 
 Other Information  3943 
 Exhibits  3944 
    
 EX-31.1
 EX-31.2
 EX-32.1
 EX-32.2

2


PART I. Financial Information
Item 1. Financial Statements
RAE Systems Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(in thousands, except share and par value data)
(unaudited)
                
 June 30, December 31,  September 30, December 31, 
 2010 2009  2010 2009 
ASSETS
  
Current assets:  
Cash and cash equivalents $18,893 $18,528  $17,882 $18,528 
Restricted cash 2,147 2,146  2,149 2,146 
Trade notes receivable 1,667 2,039  1,957 2,039 
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $5,773 and $5,380, respectively 20,458 19,428 
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $6,143 and $5,380, respectively 19,756 19,428 
Accounts receivable from affiliate 209 322  217 322 
Inventories 12,752 12,068  14,392 12,068 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 4,511 3,983  4,951 3,983 
Income taxes receivable  659   659 
          
Total current assets 60,637 59,173  61,304 59,173 
          
Property and equipment, net 16,726 15,590  17,595 15,590 
Intangible assets, net 1,984 2,428  284 2,428 
Investments in unconsolidated affiliates 259 358  244 358 
Other assets 477 1,325  554 1,325 
     
Total assets $80,083 $78,874  $79,981 $78,874 
          
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
  
Current liabilities:  
Accounts payable $7,294 $6,454  $6,621 $6,454 
Accounts payable to affiliate 37 92  10 92 
Bank debt, current 5,492 4,026  5,551 4,026 
Accrued liabilities 15,031 15,753  15,557 15,753 
Notes payable to related parties, current 386 370  365 370 
Income taxes payable 372 199  851 199 
Deferred revenue, current 501 603  454 603 
          
Total current liabilities 29,113 27,497  29,409 27,497 
     
Deferred revenue, non-current 501 615  435 615 
Deferred tax liabilities, non-current 108 156  111 156 
Bank debt, non-current  1,463   1,463 
Deferred gain on sale of real estate, non-current 4,126 4,444  3,968 4,444 
Other long-term liabilities 863 781  1,529 781 
Notes payable to related parties, non-current 356 363   363 
          
Total liabilities 35,067 35,319  35,452 35,319 
          
  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (NOTE 5)
  
  
SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY:
  
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 200,000,000 shares authorized; 59,431,601 and 59,438,328 shares issued and outstanding, respectively 59 59 
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 200,000,000 shares authorized; 59,476,243 and 59,438,328 shares issued and outstanding, respectively 59 59 
Additional paid-in capital 64,487 63,832  64,804 63,832 
Accumulated other comprehensive income 6,276 6,844  7,453 6,844 
Accumulated deficit  (30,097)  (31,706)  (31,574)  (31,706)
          
Total RAE Systems Inc. shareholders’ equity 40,725 39,029  40,742 39,029 
Noncontrolling interest 4,291 4,526  3,787 4,526 
          
Total shareholders’ equity 45,016 43,555  44,529 43,555 
          
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $80,083 $78,874  $79,981 $78,874 
          
. 
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

3


RAE Systems Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(in thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended 
 June 30, June 30,  September 30, September 30, 
 2010 2009 2010 2009  2010 2009 2010 2009 
Net sales $23,300 $19,907 $42,095 $39,020  $24,948 $19,909 $67,043 $58,929 
Cost of sales 9,453 10,039 18,059 19,822  10,428 9,636 28,487 29,458 
                  
Gross profit 13,847 9,868 24,036 19,198  14,520 10,273 38,556 29,471 
                  
Operating expenses:  
Sales and marketing 5,199 4,849 9,857 9,231  5,632 4,282 15,489 13,513 
Research and development 1,844 1,384 3,531 2,979  2,028 1,787 5,559 4,766 
General and administrative 4,869 5,692 8,967 10,105  5,815 8,118 14,782 18,223 
Impairment of intangible asset 1,489  1,489  
                  
Total operating expenses 11,912 11,925 22,355 22,315  14,964 14,187 37,319 36,502 
                  
Operating income (loss) 1,935  (2,057) 1,681  (3,117)
Operating (loss) income  (444)  (3,914) 1,237  (7,031)
Other income (expense):  
Interest income 24 8 47 �� 17  17 13 64 30 
Interest expense  (18)  (90)  (69)  (235)  (80)  (79)  (149)  (314)
Other, net 45 53 99  (8)  (207) 148  (108) 140 
Equity in loss of unconsolidated affiliate  (45)  (66)  (96)  (133)  (17)  (47)  (113)  (180)
                  
Income (loss) before income taxes 1,941  (2,152) 1,662  (3,476)
Income tax expense  (159)  (401)  (288)  (360)
(Loss) income before income taxes  (731)  (3,879) 931  (7,355)
Income tax (expense) benefit  (1,133) 215  (1,421)  (145)
                  
Net income (loss) 1,782  (2,553) 1,374  (3,836)
Net loss  (1,864)  (3,664)  (490)  (7,500)
Net loss attributable to the noncontrolling interest 191 303 235 598  387 175 622 773 
                  
Net income (loss) attributable to RAE Systems Inc. $1,973 $(2,250) $1,609 $(3,238)
Net (loss) income attributable to RAE Systems Inc. $(1,477) $(3,489) $132 $(6,727)
                  
  
Net income (loss) per share-basic $0.04 $(0.03) $0.03 $(0.05)
Net (loss) income per share-basic $(0.03) $(0.06) $ $(0.11)
                  
Net income (loss) per share-diluted $0.04 $(0.03) $0.03 $(0.05)
Net (loss) income per share-diluted $(0.03) $(0.06) $ $(0.11)
                  
  
Weighted-average common shares outstanding-basic 59,411 59,359 59,408 59,351  59,430 59,375 59,415 59,359 
Stock options 136  139     221  
                  
Weighted-average common shares outstanding-diluted 59,547 59,359 59,547 59,351  59,430 59,375 59,636 59,359 
                  
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

4


RAE Systems Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(in thousands)
(unaudited)
        
         Nine Months Ended 
 Six Months Ended June 30,  September 30, 
 2010 2009  2010 2009 
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
  
Net income (loss) $1,374 $(3,836)
Net loss $(490) $(7,500)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:  
Depreciation and amortization 1,411 1,713  2,074 2,528 
Gain on disposal of property and equipment  (291)  (316)  (450)  (474)
Stock based compensation expense 661 723  926 923 
Equity in loss of unconsolidated affiliate 96 133  113 180 
Deferred income tax (benefit) expense  (49) 274 
Deferred income tax benefit  (137)  (84)
Amortization of discount on notes payable to related parties 7 26  39 82 
Impairment of intangible asset 1,489  
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:  
Accounts receivable  (1,317) 2,004   (170) 2,473 
Accounts receivable from affiliate 113  (51) 107  (123)
Trade notes receivable 366 154  122 119 
Inventories  (838) 3,140   (2,134) 3,136 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  (553) 289   (817) 781 
Income taxes receivable 659 49  659 793 
Other assets 185 430  129 471 
Accounts payable 875  (1,247) 96 482 
Accounts payable to affiliate  (56)  (307)  (83)  (299)
Accrued liabilities  (1,445)  (482)  (922) 1,102 
Income taxes payable 203 26  622  (173)
Deferred revenue  (216)  (202)  (330)  (286)
Other liabilities 91  (52) 660 64 
          
Net cash provided by operating activities 1,276 2,468  1,503 4,195 
          
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
  
Acquisition of property and equipment  (672)  (2,031)  (1,840)  (2,222)
          
Net cash used in investing activities  (672)  (2,031)  (1,840)  (2,222)
          
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
  
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options 57  
Proceeds from bank loans  1,899   1,899 
Repayments of bank loans   (732)   (732)
Repurchases of common stock  (6)    (11)  (7)
Dividends paid  (117)  
Payments on notes payable to related parties  (7)  (1,160)  (318)  (1,930)
          
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities  (13) 7 
Net cash used in financing activities  (389)  (770)
          
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents  (226) 27  80 109 
Increase in cash and cash equivalents 365 471 
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents  (646) 1,312 
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period 18,528 14,845  18,528 14,845 
     
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period $18,893 $15,316  $17,882 $16,157 
          
  
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:  
Cash paid for interest $172 $364  $324 $674 
Cash paid for taxes, net  (578) 315 
Cash paid for taxes 141 370 
Cash received for tax refunds 659 742 
Non-cash investing and financing activities:  
Unpaid property and equipment 997 1,337  861 1,339 
See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.

5


Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(unaudited)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The Company
     Founded in 1991, RAE Systems Inc. (the “Company” or “RAE Systems”), a Delaware company, develops and manufactures rapidly-deployable, multi-sensor chemical and radiation detection monitors and networks for oil and gas, hazardous material management, industrial safety, civil defense and environmental remediation applications. The Company’s products are based on proprietary sensor technology, and include personal, breathing zone, portable, wireless and fixed chemical detection monitors and radiation detectors.
     As a result of an independent investigation conducted by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors during fiscal year 2008, the Company made a voluntary disclosure to the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) that the Company may have violated United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). The Company is cooperating with the DOJ and the SEC in connection with their review of the matter and is actively engaged in settlement discussions. Although no assurances can be given as to whether the matter will settle or the amount of any settlement, the Company accrued $3.5 million in the third quarter of 2009 for the potential settlement of this matter. In June 2010, the Company met with officials from the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to provide an update on the Company’s compliance with the FCPA. The management team expectsManagement is working diligently with both the DOJ and the SEC to haveobtain closure on this matter
Definitive Acquisition Agreement with Battery Ventures
     On September 19, 2010, the Company signed a definitive agreement to be acquired by Battery Ventures for $1.60 in cash per share (other than certain shares held by our founders, Robert Chen, Peter Hsi and affiliated entities). The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including the approval of RAE Systems’ stockholders.
     In connection with the Battery Ventures acquisition agreement, ten lawsuits have been filed against the company and members of its board of directors. These suits were filed in State Courts in California and Delaware and in the near future.Federal District Court in California. The suits allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by conducting an unfair sales process and agreeing to an unfair price, are receiving improper personal benefits, and were aided and abetted by the other defendants, and the Federal suit alleges violations of federal securities laws as well. The company believes the claims in these suits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, there can be no assurances as to the outcome of the litigation. See “Note 5. Commitments and Contingencies” for more detail.
Basis of Presentation
     The financial information presented in this Form 10-Q is unaudited and is not necessarily indicative of the future consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of RAE Systems. The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements contained in this Form 10-Q have been prepared on the same basis as the annual consolidated financial statements and, in the opinion of management, reflect all adjustments, which include only normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly the Company’s financial position at the date of the interim balance sheets, results of operations and its cash flows for the stated periods, in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The consolidated balances at December 31, 2009, were derived from the audited consolidated financial statements included in the Company’s Annual Report (“Annual Report”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009. The condensed consolidated financial statements included in this report should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, included in the Annual Report.
Principles of Consolidation
     The condensed consolidated financial statements include the Company and its subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated. The ownership of other interest holders of consolidated subsidiaries is reflected as noncontrolling interest.

6


Use of Estimates
     The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable based on available information. Actual results may differ materially from these estimates and assumptions.
Revenue Recognition
     The Company recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. A provision for estimated product returns is established at the time of sale based upon historical return rates adjusted for current economic conditions. Historically, the Company has experienced an insignificant amount of sales returns. The Company generally recognizes revenue upon shipment to its distributors in accordance with standard

6


contract terms that pass title of all goods upon delivery to a common carrier (Free on board, “FOB”) and provides for sales returns under standard product warranty provisions. For non-standard contract terms where title to goods passes upon delivery to the customer (FOB destination), revenue is recognized after the Company has established proof of delivery. Revenues related to services performed under the Company’s extended warranty program are recognized as earned based upon contract terms, generally ratably over the term of service. The Company records project installation work in Asia using the percentage-of-completion method. Net sales also include amounts billed to customers for shipping and handling. The Company’s shipping costs are included in cost of sales. Net sales does not include sales tax.
Stock-Based Compensation Expense
     The fair value of each option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton valuation method. Accordingly, stock-based compensation cost is measured at grant date based on the fair value of the award and recognized in expense over the requisite service, which is generally the vesting period.
     The impact on the Company’s results from operations of recording stock-based compensation by function for the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009 was as follows:
                 
  Three Months Ended  Six Months Ended 
  June 30,  June 30, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009  2010  2009 
Cost of sales $23  $20  $46  $35 
Sales and marketing  33   26   65   44 
Research and development  33   35   68   115 
General and administrative  218   278   482   529 
             
Total $307  $359  $661  $723 
             
 
The following is a summary of options (in thousands, except weighted-average exercise price):
          Options Outstanding 
          Number  Weighted-Average 
          of Shares  Exercise Price 
Balance as of January 1, 2010          5,393  $1.97 
Granted          10   0.85 
Exercised              
Canceled          (4)  0.66 
                
Balance as of March 31, 2010          5,399   1.97 
Granted          110   0.78 
Exercised              
Canceled              
                
Balance as of June 30, 2010          5,509   1.95 
                
                 
  Three Months Ended  Nine Months Ended 
  September 30,  September 30, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009  2010  2009 
Cost of sales $23  $22  $69  $57 
Sales and marketing  37   (119)  102   (75)
Research and development  30   (8)  98   107 
General and administrative  175   305   657   834 
             
Total $265  $200  $926  $923 
             

7


     The following is a summary of options (in thousands, except weighted-average exercise price):
         
  Options Outstanding 
  Number  Weighted-Average 
  of Shares  Exercise Price 
Balance as of January 1, 2010  5,393  $1.97 
Granted  10   0.85 
Exercised      
Canceled  (4)  0.66 
        
Balance as of March 31, 2010  5,399   1.97 
Granted  110   0.78 
Exercised      
Canceled      
        
Balance as of June 30, 2010  5,509   1.95 
Granted  15   0.77 
Exercised  (50)  1.13 
Canceled  (156)  1.12 
        
Balance as of September 30, 2010  5,318   1.98 
        
     The fair value of the Company’s stock options granted to employees for the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009 was estimated using the following weighted-average assumptions:
                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended 
 June 30, June 30,  September 30, September 30, 
 2010 2009 2010 2009  2010 2009 2010 2009 
Expected volatility  110%  85%  110%  85%  110%  85%  110%  85%
Expected dividend yield  0%  0%  0%  0%  0%  0%  0%  0%
Risk-free interest rate  2.6%  2.3%  2.6%  2.3%  1.9%  2.3%  2.5%  2.3%
Expected term in years 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0  6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 
Weighted-average grant date fair value $0.65 $0.70 $0.66 $0.70  $0.64 $0.70 $0.65 $0.70 
     Stock Option Plans
     In June 2007, the shareholders of RAE Systems approved the Company’s 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”) at the annual meeting of shareholders. The 2007 Plan replaced the Company’s 2002 Stock Option Plan (the “2002 Plan”). A total of 4,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock are authorized for issuance under the 2007 Plan. The maximum number of shares that may be issued under the 2007 plan will be increased from time to time by shares subject to options granted under the 2002 Plan that expire or are terminated and by shares acquired under the 2002 Plan that are forfeited or repurchased by the Company for the option holder’s purchase price. However, no more than 1,500,000 additional shares may be authorized for issuance under the 2007 Plan as a result of these adjustments.
     As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, the Company has reserved 120,87793,442 shares of common stock for issuance under its 1993 Stock Option Plan, 2,078,8772,025,126 shares under the 2002 Plan and 3,309,1673,199,479 shares under the 2007 Plan. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, 1,254,5411,264,541 shares have been added to the balance available for grant under the 2007 Plan as a result of grants cancelled under the 2002 Plan and 1,795,3741,908,812 shares of common stock remain available for future grants under the 2007 Plan.
     Non-Plan Stock Options
     In 2002, the Company granted certain of its director’s non-plan options to purchase 400,000 shares of common stock at a weighted-average exercise price of $0.99 per share. The options vested 25% after one year with the remainder vesting pro-rata monthly over the following three years. From 2002 to 2006, the Company issued 300,000 shares of common stock due to the exercise of such options. There have been no further grants, exercises or cancellations through JuneSeptember 30, 2010. As such, total outstanding non-plan stock options at JuneSeptember 30, 2010 were 100,000 at a weighted-average exercise price of $1.06. The vested options are

8


exercisable over ten years from the date of grant. There was no stock-based compensation expense recorded during the three and sixnine month periods ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and no stock-based compensation expense remains to be recorded related to thesenon-plan options.
     Non-Plan Restricted Stock
     In August 2006, the Company granted 536,000 shares of restricted stock to four individuals as an inducement to join the Company. Twenty five percent of this restricted stock or 134,000 shares vested in July 2007 with the remainder vesting quarterly over the following three years subject to accelerated vesting in certain circumstances.
     The fair market value of the Company’s common shares on the dates the awards were granted represents unrecognized stock-based compensation which is being amortized on a straight-line basisratably over the vesting period of the underlying stock awards. Vesting was completed during the third quarter of 2010. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, $5,000 of estimatedno stock-based compensation expense related to restricted stock awards remainsremained to be recorded. That cost is expected to be recorded during the third quarter of 2010.

8


     The following is a summary of activity for the non-plan stock awards (in thousands, except per share amounts):
                
 Restricted Stock Awards  Restricted Stock Awards 
 Weighted-Average  Weighted-Average 
 Number Grant Date  Number Grant Date 
 of Shares Fair Value  of Shares Fair Value 
Unvested as of January 1, 2010 47 $2.81  47 $2.81 
Granted      
Vested  (16) 2.81   (16) 2.81 
Forfeited      
      
Unvested as of March 31, 2010 31 2.81  31 2.81 
Granted      
Vested  (15) 2.81   (15) 2.81 
Forfeited      
      
Balance as of June 30, 2010 16 2.81  16 2.81 
Granted   
Vested  (16) 2.81 
Forfeited   
      
Balance as of September 30, 2010   
   
Earnings Per Share
     Basic earnings per common share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing net income (loss)or loss attributable to RAE Systems by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per common share reflects the potential dilution of common stock equivalents, such as options and warrants, to the extent the impact is dilutive. As the Company incurred a net loss for the three months ended September 30, 2010 and net losses for the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009, the effect of potentially dilutive securities on diluted net loss per share computations was anti-dilutive.anti-dilutive for these periods.
     The weighted-average number of shares attributable to anti-dilutive stock options excluded from the diluted net incomeloss per common share calculation for the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 was 5,355,9214,790,334 and 5,321,400,4,801,147, respectively. The weighted-average number of anti-dilutive shares excluded from the diluted net loss per common share calculation for the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009 was 4,679,7644,880,232 and 4,724,024,4,926,143, respectively.
Segment Reporting
     FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 280,“Segment Reporting,”establishes standards for public business enterprises to report information about operating segments in their annual financial statements and requires that those enterprises report selected information about operating segments in subsequent interim financial reports issued to shareholders. It also established standards for related disclosure about products and services, geographic areas, and major customers. Operating segments are

9


components of an enterprise, which are evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision-makers in deciding how to allocate and assess resources and performance. The Company’s chief operating decision-makers are the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer. Although the Company’s operating segments consist of entities geographically based in the Americas, Asia and Europe, the Company operates in a single reportable segment worldwide in the sale of portable and wireless chemical and radiation detection products and related services.
Variable Interest Entities
     S.A.R.L RAE France (“RAE France”) is the exclusive distributor of RAE Systems products in France. RAE Systems owns 49% of RAE France’s common stock and is the distributor’s largest shareholder. Although the operations of RAE France generally are independent of RAE Systems, through governance rights, the Company may direct RAE France’s business strategies. The Company has identified RAE France as a variable interest entity with RAE Systems as the primary beneficiary since inception in the fourth quarter of 2004. Accordingly, the Company has consolidated RAE France since December 2004.

9


     RAE France had total sales of $500,000$602,000 and $520,000$600,000 in the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and total sales of $1.2$1.8 million and $1.2$1.8 million in the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The carrying amounts of the major classes of RAE France assets and liabilities included in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets were as follows:
                
 June 30, December 31,  September 30, December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009  2010 2009 
Cash and cash equivalents $80 $299  $12 $299 
Accounts receivable 384 438  611 438 
Inventories 156 198  198 198 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets 121 142  123 142 
          
Total current assets 741 1,077  944 1,077 
Other non-current assets 52 77  50 77 
          
Total assets $793 $1,154  $994 $1,154 
  
Accounts payable $17 $24  $16 $24 
Accrued liabilities 273 332  317 332 
          
Total current liabilities $290 $356  $333 $356 
          
     There were no restrictions or other special conditions on the assets or liabilities of RAE France.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
     In June 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance for determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity (“VIE”) and requires an enterprise to perform an analysis to determine whether the enterprise’s variable interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a VIE. Under this guidance, an enterprise has a controlling financial interest when it has a) the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and b) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The guidance also requires an enterprise to assess whether it has an implicit financial responsibility to ensure that a VIE operates as designed when determining whether it has power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. The guidance became effective for the Company on January 1, 2010, and requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE as well as certain enhanced disclosures. The Company evaluated its investments and concluded it does not have any additional variable interests which give it controlling financial interest in a VIE; therefore, the adoption of this new standard did not have a material impact on its financial statements.
     In October 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on revenue recognition that will become effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. Under the new guidance on arrangements that include software elements, tangible products that have software components that are essential to the functionality of the tangible product will no longer be within the scope of the software revenue recognition guidance, and software-enabled products will now be subject to other relevant revenue

10


recognition guidance. Additionally, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables that are outside the scope of the software revenue recognition guidance. Under the new guidance, when vendor specific objective or third party evidence for deliverables in an arrangement cannot be determined, a best estimate of the selling price is required to separate deliverables and allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method. The new guidance includes new disclosure requirements on how the application of the relative selling price method affects the timing and amount of revenue recognition. The Company is currently assessing the potential effect, if any, on its financial statements.
     In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2010-06, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Instruments.” ASU No. 2010-06 amends ASC 820 to require additional disclosures regarding fair value measurements. Specifically, the ASU requires entities to disclose the amounts and reasons for significant transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, to disclose reasons for any transfers in or out of Level 3 and to separately disclose information in the reconciliation of recurring Level 3 measurements about purchases, sales, issuances and

10


settlements. In addition, the ASU amends ASC 820 to clarify certain existing disclosure requirements. Except for the requirement to disclose information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the reconciliation of recurring Level 3 measurements separately, the amendments to ASC 820 made by ASU No. 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009. The adoption of these provisions of ASU No. 2010-06 did not have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements. The requirement to separately disclose purchases, sales, issuances and settlements of recurring Level 3 measurements is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company does not expect the adoption of the remaining provisions of this ASU to have a material impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.
Note 2. Composition of Certain Financial Statement Items
Inventories
     Inventories are stated at the lower of standard cost, which approximates actual cost computed on a first-in, first-out basis, or market and include material, labor and manufacturing overhead costs. The components of inventories were as follows:
                
 June 30, December 31,  September 30, December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009  2010 2009 
Raw materials $5,818 $5,655  $7,602 $5,655 
Work-in-progress 2,724 2,557  3,622 2,557 
Finished goods 4,210 3,856  3,168 3,856 
          
Total inventories $12,752 $12,068  $14,392 $12,068 
          
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
         
  June 30,  December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009 
Supplier advances and deposits $652  $1,330 
Accounts receivable from employees  626   81 
Prepaid insurance  224   275 
Deferred tax assets, current  1,026   934 
Other current assets  1,983   1,363 
       
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets $4,511  $3,983 
       
Property and equipment, net
         
  June 30,  December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009 
Buildings and improvements $11,989  $11,945 
Equipment  5,010   4,788 
Computer equipment  5,080   4,996 
Automobiles  1,255   1,385 
Furniture and fixtures  439   444 
Construction in progress  5,316   3,468 
       
   29,089   27,026 
Less: Accumulated depreciation  (12,363)  (11,436)
       
Total property and equipment, net $16,726  $15,590 
       
         
  September 30,  December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009 
Supplier advances and deposits $944  $1,330 
Accounts receivable from employees  709   81 
Prepaid insurance  375   275 
Deferred tax assets, current  1,041   934 
Other current assets  1,882   1,363 
       
Total prepaid expenses and other current assets $4,951  $3,983 
       

11


Property and equipment, net
         
  September 30,  December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010  2009 
Buildings and improvements $12,190  $11,945 
Equipment  5,143   4,788 
Computer equipment  5,178   4,996 
Automobiles  1,285   1,385 
Furniture and fixtures  442   444 
Construction in progress  6,313   3,468 
       
   30,551   27,026 
Less: Accumulated depreciation  (12,956)  (11,436)
       
Total property and equipment, net $17,595  $15,590 
       
Intangible assets, net
                        
                         September 30, 2010 December 31, 2009 
 June 30, 2010 December 31, 2009    Net   Net 
 Gross Carrying Accumulated Net Gross Carrying Accumulated Net  Gross Carrying Accumulated Carrying Gross Carrying Accumulated Carrying 
(in thousands) Amount Amortization Carrying Amount Amount Amortization Carrying Amount  Amount Amortization Amount Amount Amortization Amount 
Customer list $5,476 $(3,744) $1,732 $5,456 $(3,376) $2,080  $5,568 $(4,001) $1,567 $5,456 $(3,376) $2,080 
Impairment of customer list  (1,489)  (1,489) 
       
Customer list, net 5,568  (5,490) 78 
Trade name 1,361  (1,109) 252 1,356  (1,008) 348  1,383  (1,177) 206 1,356  (1,008) 348 
                          
Total $6,837 $(4,853) $1,984 $6,812 $(4,384) $2,428  $6,951 $(6,667) $284 $6,812 $(4,384) $2,428 
                          
     Amortization expense associated with intangible assets was $226,000$228,000 and $242,000$219,000 for the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and $452,000$680,000 and $495,000$714,000 for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
     In the third quarter of 2010 the Company evaluated the carrying values of its customer list and other long-lived assets at RAE Fushun. Revenues declined significantly in the quarter and the year to date, and the Company does not expect a near-term recovery in this market. As a result, the Company determined that the carrying value of the customer list and other long-lived assets was more than the estimated undiscounted cash flows. Accordingly, the Company estimated the fair value of the customer list using a discounted cash flow analysis and recorded an impairment charge of $1.5 million to write-off the carrying amount in excess of fair value. The other long-lived assets consisted principally of land use rights and buildings for which the Company has third party evidence indicating a fair market value in excess of the carrying amount. As a result, these long-term assets were not impaired at September 30, 2010.
     Based on the carrying amount of intangible assets as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, and assuming no future impairment of the underlying assets, the estimated future amortization is as follows(in thousands):
        
Years Ended December 31,  
Remainder of 2010 $454  $90 
2011 640  140 
2012 374  36 
2013 282  18 
2014 162 
Thereafter 72   
      
Total amortization $1,984  $284 
      

12


Accrued liabilities
                
 June 30, December 31,  September 30, December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009  2010 2009 
Compensation and related benefits $3,135 $3,764  $3,121 $3,764 
Accrued commissions 2,289 1,265  2,225 1,265 
Accrued FCPA settlement (see Note 5) 3,500 3,500  3,500 3,500 
Accrued construction in progress 1,999 1,170  1,857 1,170 
Accrued professional fees 641 426  712 426 
Customer deposits 640 941  934 941 
Other 2,827 4,687  3,208 4,687 
          
Total accrued liabilities $15,031 $15,753  $15,557 $15,753 
          
Note 3. Income Tax
     The Company estimates its annual effective tax rate for the year and applies that rate to the year to date profit before tax to determine the quarterly and year to date tax expense. Certain loss entities are excluded from the calculation of annual estimated effective tax rate if the Company anticipates that it will not be able to recognize a benefit from those loss entities at year end. Certain expenses are accounted for as discrete to the quarter and excluded from the estimated annual effective tax rate.
     The effective tax rate after discrete items for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, was 17%153% of pretax income, compared to 10%2% of pretax loss for the same period in 2009. The tax rate for the third quarter of 2010 differed from the U.S. statutory rate primarily due to the tax effect of foreign earnings taxed at lower rates, losses not benefited of $5.7 million, nondeductible costs of $1.4 million related to the acquisition transaction with Battery Ventures announced September 20, 2010, dividend income of $2.5 million from a foreign subsidiary, and discrete true-up adjustments applicable to 2010.
     The effective tax rate is highly dependent upon the geographic distribution of the Company’s worldwide earnings or loss, tax regulations in each geographic region, the availability of tax credits and carryforwards, and the effectiveness of its tax planning strategies. The Company regularly monitors the assumptions used in estimating its annual effective tax rate and adjusts its estimates accordingly. If actual results differ from its estimates, future income tax expense could be materially affected.

12


     The Company’s valuation allowance was determined in accordance with the existing authoritative guidance, which requires an assessment of both positive and negative evidence when determining whether it is more likely than not that deferred tax assets are recoverable, with such assessment being required on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. Management believes that sufficient uncertainty exists with regard to the realizability of some tax assets such that a valuation allowance is necessary. Factors considered in providing a valuation allowance include the lack of a significant history of consistent profits, the current beliefpotential impact of continued weakness in the overall market for the Company’s products thereby potentially impactinghistorical losses on the Company’s ability to sustain or grow revenues and earnings in the future, and the length of carryback and carryforward periods.
     At December 31, 2009, the Company concluded it was appropriate to have a full valuation allowance for its deferred tax assets in certain jurisdictions. The Company continued to maintain a full valuation allowance for these jurisdictions as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010. During fiscal 2009, the Company concluded that the operating results of one of its Chinese subsidiaries had declined and that it was appropriate to put a full valuation allowance on the related deferred tax asset. The Company expects to provide a full valuation allowance on future tax benefits until it can sustain a level of profitability that demonstrates its ability to utilize these assets. The amount of the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, however, could be reduced in future periods to the extent that future taxable income is realized.

13


Note 4. Comprehensive Loss
     The components of comprehensive loss were as follows:
                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended 
 June 30, June 30,  September 30, September 30, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 2010 2009  2010 2009 2010 2009 
Net income (loss) $1,782 $(2,553) $1,374 $(3,836)
Net loss $(1,864) $(3,664) $(490) $(7,500)
Other comprehensive income:  
Change in foreign currency translation  (273) 276  (568) 132  1,177 205 609 337 
                  
Comprehensive income (loss) 1,509  (2,277) 806  (3,704)
Comprehensive loss  (687)  (3,459) 119  (7,163)
Comprehensive loss attributable to the noncontrolling interest 191 303 235 598  387 175 622 773 
                  
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to RAE Systems Inc. $1,700 $(1,974) $1,041 $(3,106)
Comprehensive (loss) income attributable to RAE Systems Inc. $(300) $(3,284) $741 $(6,390)
                  
Note 5. Commitments and Contingencies
Regulatory Compliance
     During fiscal year 2008, the Company’s internal audit department identified certain payments and gifts made by certain personnel in the Company’s operations in the People’s Republic of China (“China”) that may have violated the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). Following this discovery, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors initiated an independent investigation. The Company has made a voluntary disclosure to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the results of its investigation. The Company has also implemented additional policies and controls with respect to compliance with the FCPA. The FCPA and related statutes and regulations provide for potential monetary penalties, criminal sanctions and in some cases debarment from doing business with the U.S. federal government in connection with violations. The Company is cooperating with the DOJ and the SEC in connection with their review of the matter and is actively engaged in settlement discussions. Although no assurances can be given as to whether the matter will settle or the amount of any settlement, the Company booked an accrual of $3.5 million in the third quarter of 2009 relating to the potential settlement of this matter. In June 2010, the Company met with officials from the Department of JusticeDOJ and the Securities and Exchange CommissionSEC to provide an update on the Company’s compliance with the FCPA. The management team expectsManagement is working diligently with both the DOJ and the SEC to haveobtain closure on this matter in the near future.matter.

13


Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 05-CV-01887-JF, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 08-15708 and 09-15369
     Polimaster Ltd. and Na&Se Trading Company, Ltd. (“Polimaster”) filed a complaint against the Company on May 9, 2005, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in a case titled Polimaster Ltd., et al. v. RAE Systems Inc. (Case No. 05-CV-01887-JF). The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company breached its contract with Polimaster and infringed upon Polimaster’s intellectual property rights. The dispute was subject to a contractual arbitration agreement, although the federal court retained jurisdiction over the matter pending completion of the arbitration. The arbitration was conducted in the spring of 2007.
     In September 2007, a Final Award was issued in the arbitration. The arbitrator ruled that Polimaster failed to prove its claims and was not entitled to any relief; that the Company had proven its counterclaims and was awarded damages of approximately $2.4 million; and that as the prevailing party, the Company was entitled to recover costs in the amount of $46,000. On October 5, 2007, RAE Systems filed a motion to confirm the Final Award. On October 17, 2007, Polimaster filed an opposition to RAE Systems’ motion to confirm the Final Award and filed its own motion to vacate the Final Award. Both motions were heard on December 7, 2007, and the district court confirmed the Final Award in an order dated February 25, 2008. Polimaster appealed from the district court’s order confirming the arbitration award in Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., No. 08-15708. The appeal is currently pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Briefing on the appeal has been completed by both sides and the appeal was argued and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010.
     When the district court confirmed the Final Award in favor of RAE Systems it did not enter judgment, an omission the district court described as a non-substantive clerical error. On September 9, 2008, the court of appeal granted leave for the district court to correct this clerical error. On January 23, 2009, the district court entered judgment in favor of RAE Systems and against Polimaster, and included in the judgment post-arbitration/pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest. Polimaster has appealed the inclusion of these two interest components in the judgment, in Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., No. 09-15369. Briefing on this appeal also has been completed by both sides and the appeal was argued and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010.

14


     On May 14, 2009, Polimaster and RAE Systems entered a First Amended And Restated Stipulation And Order Re Stay Of Execution Of Judgment In Favor Of RAE Systems Inc. (the “stipulation”), pursuant to which Polimaster wire transferred $1.4 million to the client trust account of RAE Systems’ counsel, McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP, and agreed to wire transfer an additional $116,224.25 per month until the entire amount deposited equals the amount of the judgment (approximately $2.8 million) plus accrued interest at the judgment rate of 0.43 percent per annum. Pursuant to the stipulation, the amounts transferred by Polimaster are being maintained in the client trust account of McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP, and shall not be distributed to RAE Systems or Polimaster, until the Ninth Circuit has ruled on Polimaster’s appeal (Nos. 08-15708 and 09-15369). McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP shall release the funds in the account to RAE Systems and/or Polimaster within seven days of the Ninth Circuit’s final ruling on the appeal, in accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s decision. Polimaster has complied with the payment schedule provided in the stipulation. Ifstipulation, and an amount sufficient to satisfy the judgment has been deposited into the account.
     Briefing on both of the appeals has been completed. The appeals were argued before a three-judge panel and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010. On September 28, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued a divided panel opinion finding that Polimaster has established a defense to the enforcement of the arbitration award in favor of RAE Systems is successfulunder Article V (1)(d) of the Convention on appeal, it is expectedthe Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”) on the ground that the arbitrator’s decision permitting RAE Systems to assert its counterclaims in the arbitration was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties. On October 12, 2010, RAE Systems petitioned the Ninth Circuit for rehearing en banc,i.e., a reconsideration of the appeal before a larger panel of 11 judges. RAE Systems’ petition is currently pending with the Ninth Circuit.
Shareholder lawsuits
     On September 20, 2010, a putative class action suit, entitledFoley v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. 110CV182985, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, against the Company, would receive approximately $1.9 million, netmembers of attorneys’its Board of Directors, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and entities affiliated with Battery Ventures. The suit alleges in summary that, in connection with the proposed acquisition of the Company by an affiliate of Battery Ventures, the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by conducting an unfair sale process and agreeing to an unfair price, are purportedly receiving improper personal benefits, and were aided and abetted by the other defendants. Plaintiff seeks, among other things, a declaration that the suit can be maintained as a class action, an injunction against the proposed merger, rescission of the Merger Agreement, a directive that the defendants exercise their fiduciary duties to implement a process to secure the best possible consideration for stockholders, imposition of a constructive trust on allegedly improper benefits, and fees and expenses.costs. Four other lawsuits making similar allegations have also been filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara against the Company, its Board of Directors and Battery Ventures or its affiliates:Angles v. RAE Systems Inc., et al.,No. 110CV183606;Greenbaum v. Chen,et al.,No. 110CV183814;AC Photonics, Inc. v. RAE Systems Inc., et al.,No. 110CV183942; andMann v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. 110CV183960. Those actions have now been consolidated. In addition, four putative class action suits with similar allegations have been filed in Delaware Chancery Court:Nelson v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5848-VCS;Venton v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5854-VCS;Quintanilla v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5872;Villeneuve v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5877. Those actions have also been consolidated, and a consolidated amended complaint has been filed. Finally, one lawsuit has been filed against the Company, members of its Board of Directors, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and Battery Ventures in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California,LaPlante v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. CV104944. This suit makes allegations similar to the others, and also adds an allegation claiming violation of the federal securities laws in connection with the preparation of the proxy statement filed by the Company in connection with the proposed acquisition. The timingCompany believes that the claims in the suits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, there can be no assurances as to the outcome of a final ruling on the appeal is not currently determinable.litigation. See “Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” for more detail.

1415


Leases
     The Company and its subsidiaries lease certain manufacturing, warehousing and other facilities under operating leases. The leases generally provide for the lessee to pay taxes, maintenance, insurance and certain other operating costs of the leased property. Total rent expense for the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, was $330,000$339,000 and $369,000,$366,000, respectively. Total rent expense for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009 was $677,000$1,016,000 and $744,000,$1,110,000, respectively. Future minimum annual payments under non-cancellable leases were as follows as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010(in thousands):
        
Years Ended December 31, Operating  Operating 
Remainder of 2010 $879  $451 
2011 1,457  1,535 
2012 1,321  1,349 
2013 1,307  1,334 
2014 1,280  1,302 
Thereafter 3,486  3,489 
      
Total minimum payments $9,730  $9,460 
      
     In December 2004, the Company moved into its current corporate headquarters in San Jose, California and abandoned a leased facility in Sunnyvale, California. During the second quarter of 2005, the Company accrued a restructuring reserve of approximately $2.0 million for the remaining lease term of the former headquarters in Sunnyvale. The discount rate used was 4.85% and the liability was not reduced for any anticipated future sublease income. In March 2007, due to improved conditions for office rentals, the Company revised the estimated loss on abandonment of the lease and reduced the operating expense by $595,000. During the second quarter of 2007, a sublease was executed with rental income commencing in June 2007. Both the master lease and the sublease expired in October 2009. Rent payments for the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009 were zero and $132,000, respectively, for the Sunnyvale building with sublease income of zero and $45,000$46,000 for the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Rent payments for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009 were zero and $263,000,$395,000, respectively, for the Sunnyvale building with sublease income of zero and $90,000$136,000 for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
     In December 2008, the Company invested approximately $1.2 million for land use rights in Shanghai, China to construct a new manufacturing, engineering and administrative facility. Construction began during the first quarter of 2010. The estimated cost to complete this project is approximately $5.3$4.4 million with the work scheduled to be completed during the first quarterhalf of 2011. Upon completion of construction, the Company intends to vacate its existing leased facility in Shanghai. Based on discussions with Shanghai government officials, the landlord of the existing Company facility, the Company believes it will be able to terminate the lease without penalty. However, no assurance can be given at this time that the Company will not be subject to a lease termination penalty.
     During the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, $23,000$33,000 and $51,000,$84,000, respectively, of interest expense was capitalized for construction of the Company’s new facility in Shanghai.
Guarantees
     The Company is permitted under Delaware law and required under RAE Systems’ Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws to indemnify its officers and directors for certain events or occurrences, subject to certain limits, while the officer is or was serving at the Company’s request in such capacity. The term of the indemnification period is for the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum amount of potential future indemnification is unlimited; however, the Company has a Director and Officer Insurance Policy that limits its exposure and enables it to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. To date the Company has not incurred any losses under these agreements.
     The Company typically agrees to indemnify its customers for any expenses or liability resulting from claimed infringements of patents, trademarks or copyrights of third parties. The terms of these indemnification agreements are generally perpetual any time after execution of the agreement. The maximum amount of potential future indemnification is unlimited. To date, the Company has not paid any amounts to settle claims or defend lawsuits.

1516


Note 6. Warranty Reserves
     The Company sells the majority of its products with a 12 to 24 month repair or replacement warranty from the date of shipment. The Company provides an accrual for estimated future warranty costs based upon the historical relationship of warranty costs to sales. The estimated future warranty obligations related to product sales are recorded in the period in which the related revenue is recognized under Accrued liabilities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following is a summary of the changes in these liabilities during the three and sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively:
                
                 Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended 
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended  September 30, September 30, 
 June 30, June 30,  2010 2009 2010 2009 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 2010 2009  
Warranty reserve at beginning of period $792 $735 $926 $707  $757 $645 $926 $707 
Provision for warranty 180 339 309 699  183 299 493 922 
Utilization of reserve  (208)  (434)  (466)  (761)  (133)  (282)  (600)  (967)
Foreign currency translation effects  (7) 5  (12)   12 3  3 
                  
Warranty reserve at end of period $757 $645 $757 $645  $819 $665 $819 $665 
                  
Note 7. Bank Debt
     The Company maintains credit facilities to support its operations in the United States and China.
     In the United States, the Company had a $10.0 million revolving credit agreement as of December 31, 2009. This credit facility is renewed annually and, on April 26, 2010, was renewed to expire on April 25, 2011. Available credit is based on a percentage of specific qualifying assets and the total facility is collateralized by a blanket security interest in the Company’s assets in the United States. The Company is required to comply with certain reporting and financial requirements in addition to the ongoing requirement to submit quarterly financial statements. Interest accrues at the floating prime bank lending rate plus 100 basis points subject to a minimum total rate of 5%. In addition, the Company pays 30 basis points annually of the average unused portion of the facility and is required to maintain a compensating balance of at least $2.0 million at all times. The compensating balance is included in Restricted cash on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, $1.8 million was outstanding against the revolving credit agreement.
     Financial covenants under the revolving credit agreement: 1) require the Company to maintain specified trailing two-quarter minimum earnings before interest, depreciation, amortization and non-cash stock compensation expenses; and 2) limit the size of potential monetary penalties under the FCPA to $3.5 million. The Company was in compliance with these covenants as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.

16


     In China, the Company generally maintains one or more unsecured revolving lines of credit to provide working capital. Borrowings under these credit facilities are generally at the current market rate for fixed rate loans of the amount and duration requested, up to one year. The maturity dates of such fixed rate loans may extend beyond the renewal date of the line of credit arrangement, which governs the advance of new loans. The availability of new loans under the Company’s current line of credit willwas allowed to expire in September 2010. The Company currently has adequate working capital in China and is negotiating long-term financing for annual renewal on September 20, 2010.its new facility under construction in Shanghai. See “Note 5. Commitments and Contingencies” for more detail.

17


     The following table presents the Company’s total linesline of credit in China for working capital and balances drawn against each as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009(in millions):
                                                        
 Chinese Renminbi U.S. Dollars    Chinese Renminbi U.S. Dollars   
 �� Amount Total Amount Total    Amount Total Amount Total   
 Amount Available Line Amount Available Line Interest  Amount Available Line Amount Available Line Interest 
 Oustanding for Use of Credit Oustanding for Use of Credit Rate  Outstanding for Use of Credit Outstanding for Use of Credit Rate 
June 30, 2010:
 
September 30, 2010:
 
Due October 12, 2010 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  5.04% 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  5.04%
                              
 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9 
  
December 31, 2009:
  
Due October 12, 2010 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  5.04% 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  5.04%
                              
 15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9  15.0 5.0 20.0 2.2 0.7 2.9 
     The loan due in October 2010 was paid in full at maturity.
Term Loan
     On November 9, 2009, RAE Fushun, the Company’s 70% owned subsidiary in Fushun, China, borrowed RMB 10.0 million, or approximately $1.5 million, to provide working capital for its operations. The loan is due on April 26, 2011 and bears interest at a fixed rate of 8.1% for 12 months. The interest rate will be reset once in November 2010 at 1.5 times the People’s Bank of China benchmark rate. Loan repayment is guaranteed by an unrelated third party, to whom RAE Fushun has granted a lien which includes the wholly owned plant and associated land rights. As a condition of the loan, the lending bank required a deposit of approximately $0.1 million from the guarantor. This deposit was funded by RAE Fushun from the loan proceeds and is included in Restricted Cash on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Note 8. Related Party Transactions
     The Company accounts for its 40% ownership in Renex Technologies Ltd. (“Renex”), a Hong Kong company following the equity method. The Company’s total investment in Renex at JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 was $242,000$225,000 and $339,000, respectively. The Company recorded losses of $45,000$17,000 and $66,000$46,000 on its equity interest in Renex for the three months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and losses of $96,000$114,000 and $133,000$180,000 in Renex for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
     The Company paid Renex zero and $95,000 for research work during the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
     In conjunction with the investment in RAE Beijing, unsecured notes payable bearing interest at 6.48% were established for the previous RAE Beijing shareholders as part of the purchase price agreement in July 2006. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, $386,000$365,000 and $370,000, respectively, was included in current notes payable to related parties in the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and $356,000zero and $363,000, respectively, was included in non-current notes payable to related parties. The remaining scheduled annual paymentspayment of principal and accrued interest under these notes from 2010 throughat maturity in July 2011 are $386,000 and $356,000, respectively.
     In conjunction with the investment in RAE Beijing in July 2006, 11.0 million shares of RAE Beijing preferred stock were issued to four shareholders of RAE Beijing. In accordance with the authoritative accounting guidance, these preferred shares were classified as liabilities and were recorded as notes payable to related parties. Although these preferred shares bear a dividend yield rate of 3% per annum, the notes payable were discounted using a market interest rate of 6.48%.is $365,000.
     In addition to its 40% ownership in Renex, the Company has investments in three distributors of RAE Systems products, RAE Australia, RAE Benelux and RAE Spain. The Company owns 19%, 10% and 19% of RAE Australia, RAE Benelux and RAE Spain, respectively. These investments are accounted for under the cost method.

17


     The Liaoning Coal Industry Group, Ltd. (“Liaoning Group”) owns a 30% interest in RAE Fushun and, on occasion, has also been a supplier to RAE Fushun.

18


     Transactions and balances with the Company’s related parties were as follows:
                                                   
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended      Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended     
 June 30, June 30, June 30, December 31,  September 30, September 30, September 30, December 31, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009  2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 
Sales:                 Accounts receivable:         Accounts receivable: 
Renex $110  $78  $205  $189       Renex $209  $322  $95 $104 $300 $292 Renex$217 $322 
RAE Australia  340   238   675   341       RAE Australia  314   59  286 189 961 531 RAE Australia 149 59 
RAE Benelux  919   853   1,436   1,340       RAE Benelux  515   253  434 610 1,870 2,002 RAE Benelux 199 253 
RAE Spain  40   167   120   220       RAE Spain  80   119  111 88 231 316 RAE Spain 104 119 
                                
 $1,409  $1,336  $2,436  $2,090    $1,118  $753  $926 $991 $3,362 $3,141 $669 $753 
                                 
                           
Purchases:                 Accounts payable:         Accounts payable: 
Renex $85  $51  $159  $97       Renex $37  $92  $111 $45 $270 $142 Renex$10 $92 
                      Liaoning Group     14  Liaoning Group  14 
                             
                   $37  $106  $10 $106 
                             
     The Company’s Director of Information Systems, Lien Chen, is the wife of our Chief Executive Officer, Robert Chen. Ms. Chen was paid a salary of $32,000$29,000 and $31,000$33,000 for the three months ended March 31,September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and $63,000$92,000 and $61,000$94,000 for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Ms. Chen also receives standard employee benefits offered to all other full-time U.S. employees. Ms. Chen does not report to Robert Chen and compensation decisions regarding Ms. Chen are performed in the same manner as other U.S. employees, with Robert Chen the final approval signatory on compensation recommendations.
Note 9. Fair Value Measurements
     The Company uses the following methods and assumptions in estimating the fair value of assets and liabilities:
     Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash: The carrying amounts reported in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets approximate fair value due to the short-term maturity of these instruments.
     Notes payable to related parties: The fair value was determined by discounting these notes payable with below market interest rates at an interest rate commensurate with commercial borrowing rates available to the Company in China.
     Intangible assets, net: The fair value is evaluated whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the asset may not be recoverable.
     The existing authoritative guidance requires that assets and liabilities carried at fair value be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
     Level 1: Quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
     Level 2: Observable market based inputs or unobservable inputs that are corroborated by market data.
     Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data.

1819


     The carrying amounts and fair values of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities were as follows:
                    
                   September 30, 2010 December 31, 2009 
 June 30, 2010 December 31, 2009  Carrying Fair Carrying Fair 
 Category Carrying Amounts Fair Value Carrying Amounts Fair Value  Category Amounts Value Amounts Value 
 (In thousands)  (In thousands) 
Cash and cash equivalents Level 1 $18,893  $18,893  $18,528  $18,528  Level 1 $17,882 $17,882 $18,528 $18,528 
Restricted cash Level 1  2,147   2,147   2,146   2,146  Level 1 2,149 2,149 2,146 2,146 
Notes payable to related parties Level 2  742   742   733   733  Level 2 365 365 733 733 
Note 10. Shareholders’ Equity
     The following table is a summary of the changes in equity:
                        
(in thousands) Three Months Ended June 30, Three Months Ended June 30, 
 2010 2009                         
 RAE Systems RAE Systems      Three Months Ended September 30, Three Months Ended September 30, 
 Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total  2010 2009 
 Equity Interest Equity Equity Interest Equity  RAE Systems RAE Systems     
 Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total 
(in thousands) Equity Interest Equity Equity Interest Equity 
Equity, Beginning of Period $38,724 $4,482 $43,206 $42,448 $5,186 $47,634  $40,725 $4,291 $45,016 $40,833 $4,883 $45,716 
Net income (loss) 1,973  (191) 1,782  (2,250)  (303)  (2,553)
Net loss  (1,477)  (387)  (1,864)  (3,489)  (175)  (3,664)
Translation adjustments  (273)   (273) 276  276  1,177  1,177 205  205 
                          
Comprehensive income (loss) 1,700  (191) 1,509  (1,974)  (303)  (2,277)
Comprehensive loss  (300)  (387)  (687)  (3,284)  (175)  (3,459)
Exercise of stock options        57  57    
Repurchases of restricted common stock  (6)   (6)      (5)   (5)  (7)   (7)
Dividends paid   (117)  (117)    
Stock-based compensation expense 307  307 359  359  265  265 200  200 
                          
Equity, End of Period $40,725 $4,291 $45,016 $40,833 $4,883 $45,716  $40,742 $3,787 $44,529 $37,742 $4,708 $42,450 
                          
                        
(in thousands) Six Months Ended June 30, Six Months Ended June 30, 
 2010 2009                         
 RAE Systems RAE Systems      Nine Months Ended September 30, Nine Months Ended September 30, 
 Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total  2010 2009 
 RAE Systems RAE Systems 
 Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total Shareholders’ Noncontrolling Total
(in thousands) Equity Interest Equity Equity Interest Equity
 Equity Interest Equity Equity Interest Equity              
Equity, Beginning of Period $39,029 $4,526 $43,555 $43,216 $5,481 $48,697  $39,029 $4,526 $43,555 $43,216 $5,481 $48,697 
Net income (loss) 1,609  (235) 1,374  (3,238)  (598)  (3,836) 132  (622)  (490)  (6,727)  (773)  (7,500)
Translation adjustments  (568)   (568) 132  132  609  609 337  337 
                          
Comprehensive income (loss) 1,041  (235) 806  (3,106)  (598)  (3,704) 741  (622) 119  (6,390)  (773)  (7,163)
Exercise of stock options        57  57    
Repurchases of restricted common stock  (6)   (6)      (11)   (11)  (7)   (7)
Dividends paid   (117)  (117)    
Stock-based compensation expense 661  661 723  723  926  926 923  923 
                          
Equity, End of Period $40,725 $4,291 $45,016 $40,833 $4,883 $45,716  $40,742 $3,787 $44,529 $37,742 $4,708 $42,450 
                          
     During the third quarter of 2010, the Company declared a dividend at RAE Beijing. As a result, the noncontrolling interest received a dividend payment of $117,000. The dividend was necessary in order to redeploy excess cash from RAE Beijing to other business units.

1920


Item 2.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
     The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contains forward-looking statements. In some cases, readers can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue.” These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those stated herein. Although management believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, performance, or achievements. For further information, refer to the sections entitled “Risk Factors” in “Part II Item 1A” of thisForm 10-Q. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the condensed consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in thisForm 10-Q.
Overview
     We are a leader in delivering innovative sensor solutions to serve industrial, energy, environmental and government safety markets worldwide. In addition, we offer a full line of portable single and multi-sensor chemical and radiation detection products. The market for our products has evolved from being strictly focused on environmental and industrial monitoring to now encompassing the public safety and energy markets. We have expanded our presence to include the broader global energy exploration and refining safety equipment market. With the formation of RAE Fushun, we are serving the coal mine safety equipment market in China.
     In 2006, we made two significant business investments in China. First in July 2006, we increased our ownership in RAE Beijing to 96%. RAE Beijing produces, sells and distributes safety and security solutions for the chemical, oil and gas, metals and energy sectors in China. Second, in December 2006, we formed RAE Fushun, a joint venture with Fushun Anyi, a former state owned company serving the coal mine safety market. This joint venture was formed to capitalize on China’s growing reliance on coal based energy. RAE Fushun manufactures and sells coal mine safety equipment. RAE Systems owns 70% of the joint venture.venture and thus consolidates RAE Fushun. We recently informed our board of directors of our intention to exercise a disciplined exit from our investment in RAE Fushun as the performance of this business has not met our long-term growth expectations.
     In China, our focus is on growing the environmental protection market and the industrial sector, including oil and gas, petro-chemicals, steel, telecommunications and coal mining. A major priority will be to introduce new products for the coal mine safety market through RAE Fushun. We believe this market will provide us a number of new business opportunities, as China continues to modernize its coal mining industry.telecommunications.
     We offer a complete line of products to meet the requirements of the various global markets that we serve. Products range from breathing zone single sensor products for specific toxic chemicals (ToxiRAE 3) to belt worn multi-gas monitors (QRAE 2) to handheld instruments (MiniRAE 3000, ppbRAE 3000 and UltraRAE) to measure total and specific volatile organic compounds, to wireless monitors for industrial and public safety applications (AreaRAE Steel and MeshGuard).
     We have expanded our wireless product offering with the introduction of MeshGuard, a single-gas, mesh radio-based monitor designed to replace single-gas fixed monitors in industrial environments that include steel mills, oil and gas exploration and chemical processing. We continue to improve our product offerings through advances in sensors and wireless networking technologies, including the RAELink 3, a wireless modem with integrated GPS and Bluetooth radio technologies that provides a data bridge for our products, and complementary products such as chemical warfare agents and particle counters. We updated several of our fixed gas monitors to meet the needs of the China market. We received an additional sensor patent for a new gamma radiation detector/dosimeter, and this was deployed in our GammaRAE II R product.
     In all of our markets we will continue to explore and develop strategic value added partnerships, to leverage our product and market expertise.
Recent Developments
     In 2008, we introduced eight new products. We now offer a complete line of products to serve the personnel safety, regulated worker safety and detection needs of the global energy market. Products range from breathing zone single sensor products for specific toxic chemicals (ToxiRAE 3 and AutoRAE Lite Calibration Station) to belt worn multi-gas monitors (QRAE II with AutoRAE Lite Calibration Station, and MultiRAE Plus) to handheld instruments (MiniRAE 3000, MiniRAE Lite, ppbRAE 3000 and UltraRAE) to measure total and specific volatile organic compounds, to wireless monitors for wireless industrial and public safety applications (AreaRAE Steel, RAELink3 and MeshGuard) as well as fixed monitors (RAEGuard, RAEGuard-S, RAEGuard PID and FMC Series Controllers) for deployment in factory or safety process management.

2021


     During 2009 we focused on the energy sector, public safety, global confined space entry, worker safety regulation, and the health exposure gas detection markets. With our ToxiRAE 3, QRAE II, MiniRAE 3000, UltraRAE 3000, AreaRAE Steel and MeshGuard we offer a full suite of portable gas detection solutions for the oil production market. In addition, the MultiRAE Plus continues to be purchased by the U.S. military for aviation safety in the handling and detection of highly toxic and flammable jet fuel.
     In 2010, we enhanced the wireless sensor capability of our MeshGuard platform, with the addition of fixed system and wireless controllers, two additional toxic gas sensors and other accessories. RAE Systems products were key in providing public venue security at the National Football League Super Bowl, the National Basketball Association All Star Game as well as the Vancouver Winter Olympics. Our Americas operations focused on government contracts, first responders, and industrial safety applications, particularly in the energy sector. Our China operation continues to sell to state run steel mills, energy markets, including downstream oil processing, petrochemicals and electric utilities. Our Europe, Middle East, and Asia Pacific region generate sales primarily from the Middle East and Asia Pacific oil producers. All of our sales regions are driving adoption of our wireless sensor solutions for applications in both safety and security. Our global markets continue to be impacted by the effects of the 2009 global recession. In each of our markets we will continue to explore and develop strategic value added partnerships, to leverage our product and market expertise.
     We are deemphasizing the lower gross margin Fire and Security integrated project installation business in China and have refocused our attention in China on the markets and the products sold and produced by the Company on a global basis, and the fixed sensor systems sold by the Company’s operations in Beijing, China. We recently informed our board of directors of our intention to exercise a disciplined exit from our investment in RAE Fushun as the performance of this business has not met our long-term growth expectations.
In June 2010, the Company met with officials from the Department of JusticeDOJ and the Securities and Exchange CommissionSEC to provide an update on the Company’s compliance with the FCPA. The management team expectsManagement is working diligently with both the DOJ and the SEC to haveobtain closure on this mattermatter.
Definitive Acquisition Agreement with Battery Ventures
     On September 19, 2010, the Company signed a definitive agreement to be acquired by Battery Ventures for $1.60 in cash per share (other than certain shares held by our founders, Robert Chen, Peter Hsi and affiliated entities). The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including the approval of RAE Systems’ stockholders.
     In connection with the Battery Ventures acquisition agreement, ten lawsuits have been filed against the company and members of its board of directors. These suits were filed in State Courts in California and Delaware and in the near future.Federal District Court in California. The suits allege that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by conducting an unfair sales process and agreeing to an unfair price, are receiving improper personal benefits, and were aided and abetted by the other defendants, and the Federal suit alleges violations of federal securities laws as well. The company believes the claims in these suits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, there can be no assurances as to the outcome of the litigation.
Critical Accounting Policies
     We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments or estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue Recognition
     We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the fee is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. A provision for estimated product returns is established at the time of sale based upon historical return rates adjusted for current economic conditions. Historically, we have experienced an insignificant amount of sales returns. We generally recognize revenue upon shipment to our distributors in accordance with standard contract terms that pass title of all goods upon delivery to a common carrier (FOB factory) and provide for sales returns under standard product warranty provisions. For non-standard contract terms, where title to goods passes upon delivery to the customer (FOB destination), revenue is recognized after we have established proof of delivery. Revenue related to services performed under our extended warranty program is recognized as earned based upon contract terms, generally ratably over the term of service. We record project installation work in Asia using the percentage-of-completion method. Net sales also include amounts billed to customers for shipping and handling. Our shipping costs are included in cost of sales. Net sales doesdo not include sales tax.

22


Accounts Receivable, Trade Notes Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
     We grant credit to our customers after undertaking an investigation of credit risk for significant amounts. An allowance for doubtful accounts is provided for estimated credit losses at a level deemed appropriate to adequately provide for known and inherent risks related to such amounts. The allowance is based on reviews of loss, history of adjustments, current economic conditions and other factors that deserve recognition in estimating potential losses. We generally do not require collateral for sales on credit. While management uses the best information available in making our determination, the ultimate recovery of recorded accounts receivable is also dependent upon future economic and other conditions that may be beyond management’s control. If there was a deterioration of a major customer’s credit-worthiness or if actual defaults were higher than what have been experienced historically, additional allowances would be required.

21


     Trade notes receivable are presented to us from some of our customers in China as a payment against the outstanding trade receivables. These notes receivable are bank guarantee promissory notes which are non-interest bearing and generally mature within nine months.
Inventories
     Inventories are stated at the lower of standard cost, which approximates actual cost computed on a first-in, first-out basis, or market and include material, labor and manufacturing overhead costs. We are exposed to a number of economic and market factors that could result in portions of our inventory becoming either obsolete or in excess of anticipated usage, or saleable only for amounts that are less than their carrying amounts. These factors include, but are not limited to, technological changes in the market, competitive pressures in products and prices, and the availability of key components from our suppliers. We establish inventory reserves when conditions exist that suggest our inventory may be in excess of anticipated demand, based upon assumptions about future demand for our products and market conditions, or the inventory is obsolete. When recorded, reserves are intended to reduce the carrying value of the inventory to its net realizable value. If actual demand for specified products deteriorates, or market conditions are less favorable than those projected, additional reserves may be required.
Long-Lived Assets
     We evaluate the recoverability of long-lived assets with finite lives periodically and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. The carrying amount of a long-lived asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. If the carrying amount of a long-lived asset is deemed not recoverable, an impairment loss is recognized for the difference between the carrying amount of the asset and its fair value, generally the present value of estimated future cash flows.
Share-Based Payments
     We recognize in our statement of operations all share-based payments, including grants of stock options, based on their grant date fair value after adjusting fair value to reflect only those shares outstanding that are actually expected to vest. We estimate the fair value of each share-based payment on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton valuation method. The Black-Scholes-Merton method requires certain assumptions about the expected life of the option and the volatility of the market price over the life of the option. The Company estimates these assumptions based on the Company’s historical experience of employee exercises and the historical market price of the Company’s stock.
Income Taxes
     We are subject to income taxes in both the United States and numerous foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in evaluating our tax positions and determining our provision for income taxes.
     Our effective tax rates differ from statutory rates primarily due to foreign earnings taxed at lower rates, losses not benefited, non-deductible share-based compensation deductions and provision changes for uncertain tax positions. Our future effective tax rates could be adversely affected by earnings being lower than anticipated in countries where we have lower statutory rates and higher than anticipated in countries where we have higher statutory rates, by changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets or liabilities, or by changes in tax laws, regulations, accounting principles, or interpretations thereof. We regularly assess the likelihood of adverse outcomes resulting from tax examinations to determine the adequacy of our provision for income taxes.

23


     Significant judgment is also required in determining any valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider all available evidence including past operating results, estimates of future taxable income, and the feasibility of tax planning strategies. In the event that we change our determination as to the amount of deferred tax assets that can be realized, we will adjust our valuation allowance with a corresponding impact to the provision for income taxes in the period in which such determination is made.

22


Recent Accounting Pronouncements
     In June 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance for determining whether an entity is a variable interest entity (“VIE”) and requires an enterprise to perform an analysis to determine whether the enterprise’s variable interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a VIE. Under this guidance, an enterprise has a controlling financial interest when it has a) the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and b) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the VIE. The guidance also requires an enterprise to assess whether it has an implicit financial responsibility to ensure that a VIE operates as designed when determining whether it has power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance. The guidance became effective January 1, 2010, and requires ongoing assessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE as well as certain enhanced disclosures. We evaluated our investments and concluded that we do not have any additional variable interests which give us a controlling financial interest in a VIE; therefore, the adoption of this new standard did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.
     In October 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on revenue recognition that will become effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. Under the new guidance on arrangements that include software elements, tangible products that have software components that are essential to the functionality of the tangible product will no longer be within the scope of the software revenue recognition guidance, and software-enabled products will now be subject to other relevant revenue recognition guidance. Additionally, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables that are outside the scope of the software revenue recognition guidance. Under the new guidance, when vendor specific objective or third party evidence for deliverables in an arrangement cannot be determined, a best estimate of the selling price is required to separate deliverables and allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method. The new guidance includes new disclosure requirements on how the application of the relative selling price method affects the timing and amount of revenue recognition. The Company is currently assessing the potential effect, if any, on its condensed consolidated financial statements.
     In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2010-06, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Instruments.” ASU No. 2010-06 amends ASC 820 to require additional disclosures regarding fair value measurements. Specifically, the ASU requires entities to disclose the amounts and reasons for significant transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, to disclose reasons for any transfers in or out of Level 3 and to separately disclose information in the reconciliation of recurring Level 3 measurements about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements. In addition, the ASU amends ASC 820 to clarify certain existing disclosure requirements. Except for the requirement to disclose information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the reconciliation of recurring Level 3 measurements separately, the amendments to ASC 820 made by ASU No. 2010-06 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009. The adoption of these provisions of ASU No. 2010-06 did not have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements. The requirement to separately disclose purchases, sales, issuances and settlements of recurring Level 3 measurements is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. We do not expect the adoption of the remaining provisions of this ASU to have a material impact on our condensed consolidated financial statements.

24


Results of Operations
Net Sales
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Net sales $23,300 $19,907 $3,393  17% $42,095 $39,020 $3,075  8% $24,948 $19,909 $5,039  25% $67,043 $58,929 $8,114  14%
     Net sales for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, increased by $3.4$5.0 million or 17%25% compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. Sales increased $4.3$5.2 million or 52%57% in Americas and $0.4$0.3 million or 12%9% in Europe and the Middle East, which was partially offset by a decrease of $1.3$0.5 million or 16%6% in Asia. The increase in the Americas was the result of orders related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill of approximately $1.0 million and generally improved sales in all product categories, of approximately $4.2 million, compared with the quarter ended September 30, 2009. The increase in Europe and the Middle East of $0.3 million was primarily due to increased sales in the oil and gas market in the Middle East and the industrial safety market in Europe, which was partially offset by a $0.3 million foreign exchange loss. The foreign exchange loss in Europe was attributable to the Euro and Pound Sterling, during the quarter ended September 30, 2010. The decrease in Asia was primarily the result of decreased sales in Fire and Security integrated project installation revenue at our Beijing, China operations of approximately $1.2 million and in the Coal Mine Safety business in Fushun, China of approximately $1.2 million, which was partially offset by improved product sales at our operations in Beijing of approximately $1.0 million and improved Asia-Pacific sales of approximately $0.5 million.
     Net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 increased $8.1 million or 14% compared with the nine months ended September 30, 2009. Sales increased $9.7 million or 38% in Americas and $0.6 million or 6% in Europe and the Middle East, which was partially offset by a decrease of $2.2 million or 10% in Asia. The increase in the Americas was primarily the result of orders related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill of approximately $3.3 million, a large order from the U.S. Army of approximately $1.0 million, and generally improved sales in the emergency response market compared with the quarter ended June 30, 2009. The increase in Europe was primarily due to increased sales in the oil and gas market in the Middle East, which was partially offset by a $0.3 million foreign exchange loss, attributable to the euro and pound sterling, during the quarter ended June 30, 2010. The decrease in Asia was primarily the result of decreased sales from Fire and Security integrated project installation revenue at our Beijing, China operations and a downturn in the Coal Mine Safety business in Fushun, China.

23


     Net sales for the sixnine months ended June 30, 2010, increased $3.1 million or 8% compared with the six months ended June 30, 2009. Sales increased $4.5 million or 28% in Americas and $0.4 million or 5% in Europe and the Middle East, which was partially offset by a decrease of $1.8 million or 11% in Asia. The increase in the Americas was primarily the result of orders related to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, a large order from the U.S. Army, and generally improved sales in the emergency response market compared with the six months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The increase in Europe and the Middle East was primarily due to increased sales in the oil and gas market in the Middle East, which was partially offset by a $0.1$0.4 million and foreign exchange loss, attributable to the euroEuro and pound sterling,Pound Sterling, during the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010. The decrease in Asia was primarily the result of decreased sales from the Fire and Security integrated project installation revenue at our Beijing, China operations of approximately $2.1 million and a downturndecline in the Coal Mine Safety business in Fushun, China.China of approximately $1.8 million, which was partially offset by increased sales in China of the products sold and produced by the Company on a global basis, and fixed sensor systems sold by the Company’s operations in Beijing, China and product sales in Asia-Pacific.
Cost of Sales & Gross Margin
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Cost of sales $9,453 $10,039 $(586)  -6% $18,059 $19,822 $(1,763)  -9% $10,428 $9,636 $792  8% $28,487 $29,458 $(971)  -3%
Gross profit $13,847 $9,868 $3,979  40% $24,036 $19,198 $4,838  25% $14,520 $10,273 $4,247  41% $38,556 $29,471 $9,085  31%
Gross margin  59%  50%  57%  49%   58%  52%  58%  50% 
     Cost of sales for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, decreasedincreased by $0.6$0.8 million or 6%8% compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009, primarily due to increased sales volume, partially offset by the lower cost associated with reduced project installation revenue at our Beijing, China operations of approximately $0.7$0.8 million, and a reduction in our provision for the inventory reserves and shipping cost of approximately $0.3 million, partially offset by incremental costs related to increased volume and an improved product mix in China which included more of the Americasproducts sold and produced by the Company on a global basis and the Middle East.fixed sensor systems sold by the Company’s operations in Beijing, China. Gross profit for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, increased by $4.0$4.3 million or 40%41% compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009, primarily due to higher sales in the Americas, Europe and the Middle East, increased sales in Asia-Pacific, increased sales in China of products sold and produced by the Company on a global basis and the fixed sensor systems traditionally sold by the Company’s operations in Beijing, China, and an improved product mix that included an increaseincreased in sales of multi-gas products, sensors and accessories.

25


     Cost of sales for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, decreased by $1.8$1.0 million or 9%3% compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30. 2009, primarily due to lower costs associated with reduced project installation revenue at our Beijing, China operations of approximately $1.1$1.8 million, and a reduction in our provision for the inventory reserves and shipping costs of approximately $0.9$0.8 million, an improved product mix, which was partially offset by incremental cost related to increased volume and an improved mix in the Americas and the Middle East.volume. Gross profit for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, increased by $4.8$9.1 million or 25%31% compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009, primarily due to higher product sales in the Americas, andthe Middle East, China and Asia-Pacific and an improved product mix that included an increase in sales of multi-gas products, sensors and accessories.
Sales and Marketing Expense
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Sales and marketing $5,199 $4,849 $350  7% $9,857 $9,231 $626  7% $5,632 $4,282 $1,350  32% $15,489 $13,513 $1,976  15%
Percentage of net sales  22%  24%  23%  24%   23%  22%  23%  23% 
     Sales and marketing expenses increased by $0.4$1.4 million or 7%32% for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The increase was primarily due to higher internal sales commissions in the Americas, external commission in the Americas accrued on the sale of wireless products in the U.S. in lieu of discounts to distributors and marketing activities to improve brand awareness for the Company and its products.additional management bonuses.
     Sales and marketing expenses increased by $0.6$2.0 million or 7%15% for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The increase in expense was due to an increase in the sales commissions in the Americas, increased headcount, additional management bonuses and marketing activities to improve sales management information, web service capabilities, and brand awareness for the Company and its products.

24


Research and Development Expense
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Research and development $1,844 $1,384 $460  33% $3,531 $2,979 $552  19% $2,028 $1,787 $241  13% $5,559 $4,766 $793  17%
Percentage of net sales  8%  7%  8%  8%   8%  9%  8%  8% 
     Research and development expenses increased by approximately $0.5$0.2 million or 33%13% for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The increase was primarily due to increased headcount, increased salaries at the RAE Engineering Center in Shanghai, China and project expenses to support new product development programs.
     Research and development expenses increased by approximately $0.6$0.8 million or 19%17% for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The increase was primarily due to increased headcount, increased salaries at the RAE Engineering Center in Shanghai, China and project expenses to support new product development programs.

26


General and Administrative Expense
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
General and administrative $4,869 $5,692 $(823)  -14% $8,967 $10,105 $(1,138)  -11% $5,815 $8,118 $(2,303)  -28% $14,782 $18,223 $(3,441)  -19%
Percentage of net sales  21%  29%  21%  26%   23%  41%  22%  31% 
     General and administrative expenses decreased by $0.8$2.3 million or 14%28% for the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The decrease was primarily due to the lower bad debt expenses associated with the provision for doubtful accounts of approximately $0.5$3.5 million and severance payments made during the quarter ended June 30,accrual, in September 2009, of approximately $0.3management’s estimate to settle the outstanding joint investigation into the Company’s alleged violations of the FCPA, which was partially offset by fees of $1.4 million that did not recur duringpaid to advisors to the quarter ended June 30, 2010.Special Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors related to the execution of an acquisition agreement with Battery Ventures to take the Company private.
     General and administrative expenses decreased by 1.13.4 million or 11%19% for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. ThisThe decrease was primarily due to the $3.5 million accrual, in September 2009, of management’s estimate to settle the outstanding joint investigation into the Company’s alleged violations of the FCPA and a decrease due to lower bad debt expenses associated with the provision for doubtful accounts of approximately $0.6 million, the collection of accounts receivable that had been previously written off as bad debt of approximately $0.3 million which was partially offset by fees of $1.8 million paid to advisors to the Special Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors related to the execution of a merger agreement with Battery Ventures to take the Company private.
Impairment of Intangible Asset
                                 
  Three Months Ended          Nine Months Ended        
  September 30,      Percentage  September 30,      Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010  2009  Change  Change  2010  2009  Change  Change 
Impairment of intangible asset $1,489  $  $1,489   100% $1,489  $  $1,489   100%
Percentage of net sales  6%  0%          2%  0%        
Due to the continued decline of revenue and severance payments made duringearnings at our Coal Mine Safety business in Fushun, China and our determination that the six months ended June 30, 2009,business is unlikely to recover through sales to existing customers, we concluded the value of approximately $0.3 million,the customer list related to this entity was impaired. Based on our estimated future cash flows, it was determined that didthe carrying amount of this intangible asset is not recur during the six months ended June 30, 2010.recoverable. The customer list is an intangible asset which was originally scheduled to be fully amortized by 2015.

27


Other Income (Expense)
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Interest income $24 $8 $16  200% $47 $17 $30  176% $17 $13 $4  31% $64 $30 $34  113%
Interest expense  (18)  (90) 72  80%  (69)  (235) 166  71%  (80)  (79)  (1)  -1%  (149)  (314) 165  53%
Other, net 45 53  (8)  15% 99  (8) 107  1338%  (207) 148  (355)  240%  (108) 140  (248)  177%
Equity in loss of unconsolidated affiliate  (45)  (66) 21  -32%  (96)  (133) 37  28%  (17)  (47) 30  -64%  (113)  (180) 67  37%
                                  
Total other income (expense) $6 $(95) $101  106% $(19) $(359) $340  95% $(287) $35 $(322)  920% $(306) $(324) $18  6%
                                  
     For the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, total other income (expense) decreased by $0.1$0.3 million or 106%920% compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The change was primarily the result of foreign exchange losses in Asia and Europe.
     For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, total other income (expense) decreased by $18,000 or 6% compared with the nine months ended September 30, 2009. The change was primarily due to lower interest expense related to amounts due for notes to the former shareholder’sshareholders of RAE Beijing and interest expense capitalized related to the construction-in-progress on the Company’s facility in Shanghai, China and the result ofpartially offset by net foreign exchange gains in Asia and Europe.

25


     For the six months ended June 30, 2010, total other income (expense) decreased by $0.3 million or 95% compared with the six months ended June 30, 2009. The change was primarily due to lower interest expense related to amounts due for notes to the former shareholder’s of RAE Beijing, interest expense capitalized related to the construction-in-progress on the Company’s facility in Shanghai, China and the result of foreign exchange gainslosses in Asia and Europe.
Income Tax Benefit (Expense)
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Income tax expense $(159) $(401) $242  -60% $(288) $(360) $72  -20% $(1,133) $215 $(1,348)  -627% $(1,421) $(145) $(1,276)  880%
Effective tax rate  8%  19%  17%  10%   -155%  -6%  153%  2% 
     Income tax expense for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, was $288,000$1.4 million compared to $360,000$145,000 for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. At December 31, 2009 and JuneSeptember 30, 2010, respectively, we concluded it was appropriate to have a full valuation allowance for our net deferred tax assets in some jurisdictions. The interim income tax expense was calculated based on the estimated annual effective tax rate for the Company of 17%153%. The tax rate for the secondthird quarter of fiscal year 2010 differed from the U.S. statutory rate primarily due to foreign earnings taxed at lower rates, losses not benefited, nondeductible stock compensation deductionsexpense, nondeductible costs related to the acquisition transaction with Battery Ventures announced September 20, 2010, dividend income, and additional provisions for uncertain tax positions applicable to fiscal year 2010. Included in the tax expense for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, were discrete tax expense items of $30,000$45,000 related to the accrual of interest related to various uncertain tax benefits, statea tax benefit of $165,000 related to the release of various uncertain tax benefits and local taxes of $16,000,associated interests, and prior year’s true-ups of ($272,000).$273,000.

28


Net Loss Attributable to the Noncontrolling Interest
                                                                
 Three Months Ended Six Months Ended    Three Months Ended Nine Months Ended   
 June 30, Percentage June 30, Percentage  September 30, Percentage September 30, Percentage 
(in thousands) 2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change  2010 2009 Change Change 2010 2009 Change Change 
Net loss attributable to the noncontrolling interest $191 $303 $(112)  -37% $235 $598 $(363)  -61% $387 $175 $212  121% $622 $773 $(151)  -20%
     For the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, the noncontrolling interest in the operating loss of consolidated subsidiaries decreasedincreased approximately $112,000$212,000 or 37%121% compared with the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The decreaseincrease was primarily due to the losses incurred at RAE Fushun, being lowerhigher during the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with losses incurred at RAE Fushun during the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The noncontrolling ownership was 4% of RAE Beijing, 30% of RAE Fushun and 51% of RAE France.
     For the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, the noncontrolling interest in the operating loss of consolidated subsidiaries decreased approximately $363,000$151,000 or 61%20% compared with the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The decrease was primarily due to the losses incurred at RAE Fushun, being lower during the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, compared with losses incurred at RAE Fushun during the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. The noncontrolling ownership was 4% of RAE Beijing, 30% of RAE Fushun and 51% of RAE France.

29


Liquidity and Capital Resources
     To date, we have financed our operations primarily through operating revenues, proceeds from the issuance of equity securities and short-term bank borrowings. In 2007, we also sold and leased back our corporate headquarters in San Jose, California. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, we had $18.9$17.9 million in cash and cash equivalents compared with $18.5 million on December 31, 2009.
     At JuneSeptember 30, 2010, we had $31.5$31.9 million in working capital (current assets less current liabilities) and a current ratio (ratio of current assets to current liabilities) of 2.1 to 1.0 compared to $31.7 million of working capital and a current ratio of 2.2 to 1.0 at December 31, 2009.
     In the United States, we have a $10.0 million revolving credit agreement. This credit facility is renewed annually and, on April 26, 2010, was renewed to expire on April 25, 2011. Available credit is based on a percentage of specific qualifying assets and the total facility is collateralized by a blanket security interest over our assets in the United States. We are required to comply with certain

26


reporting and financial requirements in addition to the ongoing requirement to submit quarterly financial statements. We must also maintain a compensating balance with the lending bank of at least $2.0 million at all times, which is included in Restricted cash on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, $1.8 million was outstanding against the revolving credit agreement in the United States.
     Financial covenants under the revolving credit agreement: 1) require us to maintain specified trailing two-quarter minimum earnings before interest, depreciation, amortization and non-cash stock compensation expenses; and 2) limit the size of potential monetary penalties under the FCPA to $3.5 million. We were in compliance with these covenants as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
     In China as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, we had an unsecured revolving line of credit in the amount of RMB 20.0 million or approximately $2.9 million. Borrowings under this line of credit are available to provide working capital and are generally at the current market rate for fixed rate loans of the amount and duration requested, up to one year. The maturity dates of these fixed rate loans may extend beyond the renewal date of the line of credit arrangement, which governs the advance of new loans. We decided to allow our revolving line of credit is renewed annually.in China to expire in September 2010. We currently have adequate working capital in China and we are negotiating long-term financing for our new facility under construction in Shanghai. As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, RMB 15.0 million, or approximately $2.2 million, was outstanding against the revolving line of credit in China. Although the line of credit expired in September 2010, the outstanding balance was due in October 2010 and was paid in full at maturity.
     In November 2009, we borrowed RMB 10.0 million, or approximately $1.5 million, for a term of 18 months to provide working capital for our 70% owned subsidiary in Fushun, China (“RAE Fushun”). Loan repayment is guaranteed by an unrelated third party, to whom RAE Fushun granted a lien over its wholly owned plant and associated land rights. As a condition of the loan, the lending bank required a deposit of RMB 1.0 million, or approximately $0.1 million, from the guarantor. This deposit was funded by RAE Fushun from the loan proceeds and is included in Restricted cash on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
     Our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows may be summarized as follows:
                
 Six Months Ended  Nine Months Ended 
 June 30,  September 30, 
(in thousands) 2010 2009  2010 2009 
Net cash provided by (used in):  
Operating activities $1,276 $2,468  $1,503 $4,195 
Investing activities  (672)  (2,031)  (1,840)  (2,222)
Financing activities  (13) 7   (389)  (770)
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents  (226) 27  80 109 
          
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents $365 $471 
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents $(646) $1,312 
          

30


Operating Activities
     For the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, net cash provided by operating activities of $1.3$1.5 million was attributable to the following factors:
  Cash flow generated from business operations was $3.2$3.6 million, which consisted of $1.4$0.5 million net incomeloss (including the loss attributable to the noncontrolling interest) and non-cash charges of $1.9$4.1 million. Principal non-cash charges were $1.4$2.1 million depreciation and amortization, $1.5 million impairment of intangible asset and $0.7$0.9 million stock-based compensation. These non-cash expenses were partially offset by a $0.3$0.4 million gain on the disposal of property and equipment.
 
  The net change in operating assets and liabilities consumed cash of $1.9$2.1 million. Cash was provided by collecting income taxes receivable of $0.7 million, notes receivable of $0.4 million, increases in trade accounts payableother liabilities of $0.9$0.7 million and income tax payable of $0.2$0.6 million. Cash was used to reduce accrued expenses $1.4by $0.9 million and increase trade accounts receivable, inventories and prepaid and other current assets $1.3by $0.2 million, $0.8$2.1 million and $0.6$0.9 million, respectively.

27


     For the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009, net cash provided by operating activities of $2.5$4.2 million was dueattributable to the following:following factors:
  TheCash flow decreased due to the net loss of $3.8$7.5 million (including the lossportion attributable to the noncontrolling interest) which was partially offset by. However, because the net loss includes non-cash charges totaling $2.5$3.1 million, the net decrease to cash was $4.4 million. Our principal non-cash expenses were as follows: $1.7$2.5 million depreciation and amortization, $0.7$0.9 million stock-based compensation, $0.3 million deferred tax expense, and $0.1$0.2 million equity indue to the loss of an unconsolidated affiliate. These non-cash expenses were partially offset by $0.3affiliates. We also recognized $0.5 million in deferred gains on the disposal of property and equipment.
 
  The net change in operating assets and liabilities which generated cash of $3.8$8.6 million. Cash was primarily provided by managed reductions of $2.2 million, $3.1$2.6 million and $0.3$3.1 million in trade accounts and notes receivable and inventories, respectively, and the collection of income tax refunds totaling $0.8 million. Additional cash flow was contributed by increases to accounts payable and accrued liabilities and a reduction in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $0.5 million, $1.1 million and $0.8 million, respectively. Meanwhile, cashCash was applied to reduce accounts payable accrued liabilities and accounts payable to affiliates by $1.2 million, $0.5 million and $0.3 million, respectively. Cash flow also decreased by $0.2 million due to a decline in deferred revenues. The net change in various other operating accounts provided additional cash flow of $0.4 million during the period.million.
Investing Activities
     Net cash used in investing activities during the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, was $0.7$1.8 million compared with $2$2.2 million for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2009. Cash used during the first sixnine months of 2010 primarily consisted of equipment purchases to supportongoing construction at our manufacturing operations.new facility in Shanghai. Cash used during the first sixnine months of 2009 primarily consisted of ongoing construction and outfitting activities at our new facility in Fushun, China and payment for land use rights in Shanghai.
     In December 2008, we purchased the land use rights for 50 years to 5 acres of land in Shanghai to construct a new manufacturing, engineering and administrative facility, which is intended to replace our existing, leased Shanghai facility. Construction began during the first quarter of 2010. The estimated cost to complete this project is approximately $5.3$4.4 million with the work scheduled to be completed in the first half of 2011. Upon completion of construction, we intend to vacate our existing leased facility in Shanghai. Based on discussions with Shanghai government officials, the landlord of the existing Company facility, we believe that we will be able to terminate the lease without penalty. However, no assurance can be given at this time that we will not be subject to lease a termination penalty.
Financing activities
     In the first sixnine months of 2010, we paid $7,000$0.3 million to reduce notes payable to related parties and $6,000parties. In order to repurchase common stock.redeploy cash from RAE Beijing to other business units, during the third quarter of 2010, the Company declared a dividend at RAE Beijing. As a result, the noncontrolling interest received a dividend payment of $0.1 million.
     In the first sixnine months of 2009, we made principal payments totaling $1.2$1.9 million to reduce the notes payable to related parties for the acquisition of RAE Beijing. These payments were made from general working capital. The next scheduled principal payment of

31


approximately $0.4 million is due in July 2010.2011. We also borrowed RMB 8.0 million, or approximately $1.2 million, to acquire land use rights in Shanghai for the construction of the new Shanghai facility discussed above.
     We believe our existing balances of cash and cash equivalents, together with cash generated from product sales, will be sufficient to meet our cash needs for working capital, debt service and capital expenditures for at least the next twelve months. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors that are difficult to predict, including the size, timing and structure of any future acquisitions, future capital investments, the ultimate resolution of issues arising from our internal investigation regarding potential FCPA violations and future results of operations. Any future financing we may require may be unavailable on favorable terms, if at all. Any difficulty in obtaining additional financial resources could force us to curtail our operations, or could prevent us from pursuing our growth strategy. Any future funding may dilute the ownership of our stockholders.

2832


Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
     The following discussion analyzes our disclosure of market risk related to concentration of credit risk, changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates.
Concentration of Credit Risk
     Currently, we have cash and cash equivalents as well as restricted cash on deposit with major financial institutions in the countries where we conduct business. Our deposits may exceed the amount of insurance available to cover such deposits. To date, we have not experienced any financial losses on these deposits. Management regularly reviews our deposit balances and the credit worthiness of the financial institutions which hold our deposits.
Interest Rate Risk
     As of JuneSeptember 30, 2010, we had cash and cash equivalents of $18.9$17.9 million and restricted cash of $2.1 million. The Company had no other significant interest bearing assets. Over time, changes to interest rates may reduce or increase our interest income, but the impact on our net income (loss) or the fair value of our interest bearing assets is not expected to be significant.
     Our borrowings in China are at fixed interest rates or at rates fixed for 12 months. The outstanding balance under our line of credit in the United States bears interest at the floating prime bank lending rate plus 100 basis points subject to a minimum total rate of 5%. As the prime rate on JuneSeptember 30, 2010, was 3.25%, our cost of funds in the United States will not increase until the prime rate rises by more than 75 basis points. On an outstanding balance of $1.8 million, the loan balance in the United States on JuneSeptember 30, 2010, annual interest expense would increase by $1,800 for each basis point thereafter.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk
     For the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, a substantial portion of our recognizedAsia revenue was generated by our Asia operations (34%(31%) that are primarilywas denominated in RMB. Revenue denominated in U.S. dollars is generated primarily from operations in the Americas (49%(52%), and revenue from our European operations (18%(17%) is primarily denominated in Euros. We manufacture a majority of our component partsproducts at our manufacturing facility in Shanghai, China.
     Our strategy has been and will continue to be to increase our overseas manufacturing and research and development activities to capitalize on lower cost capacity and efficiencies in supply-chain management. In 2004 and 2006, we acquired a Beijing-based manufacturer and distributor of environmental safety and security equipment. In late 2006, we formed RAE Fushun to capitalize on increases in demand for safety equipment in the mining and energy market sectors in China. There has been continued speculation in the financial press that China’s currency, the RMB, will be subject to a further market adjustment relative to the U.S. dollar and other currencies. If, for example, there was a hypothetical 10% change in the RMB relative to the U.S. dollar, the effect on our net income would have been approximately $0.5$1.0 million for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010. From January 1 through September 30, 2010, the RMB appreciated RMB 0.14 or 2.0% measured against the U.S. dollar.
     If the currencies in all other countries in Europe and Asia where we have operations were to change in unison with the RMB by a hypothetical 10% relative to the U.S. dollar, the effect on our net income would have been approximately $(0.4)$(0.5) million for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010. The difference of $0.9$1.5 million is attributable to the impact of foreign currencies outside of China, principally the Euro. From January 1 through JuneSeptember 30, 2010, the Euro depreciated $0.21$0.07 or 14.8%5.0% measured against the U.S. dollar.
     To the extent that we have international sales denominated in U.S. dollars, any fluctuation in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies could affect our competitive position in the international markets. Although we continue to monitor our exposure to currency fluctuations and, when appropriate, may use financial hedging techniques in the future to minimize the effect of these fluctuations, we cannot be certain that exchange rate fluctuations will not adversely affect our financial results in the future.

2933


Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
     Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, the Company evaluated the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The evaluation considered the procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports filed or submitted by the Company under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and communicated to our management as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010.
     There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.

3034


PART II. Other Information
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Regulatory Compliance
     During fiscal year 2008, the Company’s internal audit department identified certain payments and gifts made by certain personnel in the Company’s operations in the People’s Republic of China (“China”) that may have violated the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”). Following this discovery, the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors initiated an independent investigation. The Company has made a voluntary disclosure to the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the results of its investigation. The Company has also implemented additional policies and controls with respect to compliance with the FCPA. The FCPA and related statutes and regulations provide for potential monetary penalties, criminal sanctions and in some cases debarment from doing business with the U.S. federal government in connection with violations. The Company is cooperating with the DOJ and the SEC in connection with their review of the matter and is actively engaged in settlement discussions. Although no assurances can be given as to whether the matter will settle or the amount of any settlement, the company booked an accrual of $3.5 million in the third quarter 2009 relating to this potential settlement. In June 2010, the Company met with officials from the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to provide an update on the Company’s compliance with the FCPA. The management teamManagement expects to have closure on this matter in the near future.
Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 05-CV-01887-JF, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 08-15708 and 09-15369
     Polimaster Ltd. and Na&Se Trading Company, Ltd. (“Polimaster”) filed a complaint against the Company on May 9, 2005, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in a case titled Polimaster Ltd., et al. v. RAE Systems Inc. (Case No. 05-CV-01887-JF). The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company breached its contract with Polimaster and infringed upon Polimaster’s intellectual property rights. The dispute was subject to a contractual arbitration agreement, although the federal court retained jurisdiction over the matter pending completion of the arbitration. The arbitration was conducted in the spring of 2007.
     In September 2007, a Final Award was issued in the arbitration. The arbitrator ruled that Polimaster failed to prove its claims and was not entitled to any relief; that the Company had proven its counterclaims and was awarded damages of approximately $2.4 million; and that as the prevailing party, the Company was entitled to recover costs in the amount of $46,000. On October 5, 2007, RAE Systems filed a motion to confirm the Final Award. On October 17, 2007, Polimaster filed an opposition to RAE Systems’ motion to confirm the Final Award and filed its own motion to vacate the Final Award. Both motions were heard on December 7, 2007, and the district court confirmed the Final Award in an order dated February 25, 2008. Polimaster appealed from the district court’s order confirming the arbitration award in Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., No. 08-15708. The appeal is currently pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Briefing on the appeal has been completed by both sides and the appeal was argued and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010.
     When the district court confirmed the Final Award in favor of RAE Systems it did not enter judgment, an omission the district court described as a non-substantive clerical error. On September 9, 2008, the court of appeal granted leave for the district court to correct this clerical error. On January 23, 2009, the district court entered judgment in favor of RAE Systems and against Polimaster, and included in the judgment post-arbitration/pre-judgment interest and post-judgment interest. Polimaster has appealed the inclusion of these two interest components in the judgment, in Polimaster Ltd. et al. v. RAE Systems Inc., No. 09-15369. Briefing on this appeal also has been completed by both sides and the appeal was argued and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010.
     On May 14, 2009, Polimaster and RAE Systems entered a First Amended And Restated Stipulation And Order Re Stay Of Execution Of Judgment In Favor Of RAE Systems Inc. (the “stipulation”), pursuant to which Polimaster wire transferred $1.4 million to the client trust account of RAE Systems’ counsel, McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP, and agreed to wire transfer an additional $116,224.25 per month until the entire amount deposited equals the amount of the judgment (approximately $2.8 million) plus accrued interest at the judgment rate of 0.43 percent per annum. Pursuant to the stipulation, the amounts transferred by Polimaster are being maintained in the client trust account of McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP, and shall not be distributed to RAE Systems or Polimaster, until the Ninth Circuit has ruled on Polimaster’s appeal (Nos. 08-15708 and 09-15369). McLeod, Witham & Flynn LLP shall release the funds in the account to RAE Systems and/or Polimaster within seven days of the Ninth Circuit’s final ruling on the appeal, in accordance with the Ninth Circuit’s decision. Polimaster has complied with the payment schedule provided in the stipulation. If RAE Systems is successfulstipulation, and an amount sufficient to satisfy the judgment has been deposited into the account.
     Briefing on appeal, it is expectedboth of the appeals has been completed. The appeals were argued before a three-judge panel and submitted to the Ninth Circuit for decision on January 15, 2010. On September 28, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued a divided panel opinion finding that the Company would receive approximately $1.9 million, net of attorneys’ fees and expenses. The timing of a final ruling on the appeal is not currently determinable.

3135


Polimaster has established a defense to the enforcement of the arbitration award in favor of RAE Systems under Article V (1)(d) of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the “New York Convention”) on the ground that the arbitrator’s decision permitting RAE Systems to assert its counterclaims in the arbitration was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties. On October 12, 2010, RAE Systems petitioned the Ninth Circuit for rehearing en banc,i.e., a reconsideration of the appeal before a larger panel of 11 judges. RAE Systems’ petition is currently pending with the Ninth Circuit.
Shareholder lawsuits
     On September 20, 2010, a putative class action suit, entitledFoley v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. 110CV182985, was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, against the Company, members of its Board of Directors, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and entities affiliated with Battery Ventures. The suit alleges in summary that, in connection with the proposed acquisition of the Company by an affiliate of Battery Ventures, the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties by conducting an unfair sale process and agreeing to an unfair price, are purportedly receiving improper personal benefits, and were aided and abetted by the other defendants. Plaintiff seeks, among other things, a declaration that the suit can be maintained as a class action, an injunction against the proposed merger, rescission of the Merger Agreement, a directive that the defendants exercise their fiduciary duties to implement a process to secure the best possible consideration for stockholders, imposition of a constructive trust on allegedly improper benefits, and fees and costs. Four other lawsuits making similar allegations have also been filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara against the Company, its Board of Directors and Battery Ventures or its affiliates:Angles v. RAE Systems Inc., et al.,No. 110CV183606;Greenbaum v. Chen,et al.,No. 110CV183814;AC Photonics, Inc. v. RAE Systems Inc., et al.,No. 110CV183942; andMann v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. 110CV183960. Those actions have now been consolidated. In addition, four putative class action suits with similar allegations have been filed in Delaware Chancery Court:Nelson v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5848-VCS;Venton v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5854-VCS;Quintanilla v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5872;Villeneuve v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., C.A. No. 5877. Those actions have also been consolidated, and a consolidated amended complaint has been filed. Finally, one lawsuit has been filed against the Company, members of its Board of Directors, the Company’s Chief Financial Officer, and Battery Ventures in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California,LaPlante v. RAE Systems Inc., et al., No. CV104944. This suit makes allegations similar to the others, and also adds an allegation claiming violation of the federal securities laws in connection with the preparation of the proxy statement filed by the Company in connection with the proposed acquisition. The Company believes that the claims in the suits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, there can be no assurances as to the outcome of the litigation.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
     You should carefully consider the risks described below before making a decision regarding an investment in our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business could be harmed, the trading price of our common stock could decline and you may lose all or part of your investment. You should also refer to the other information contained in this report, including our financial statements and the related notes.
We have discovered potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the resolution of which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.
     During fiscal year 2008, our internal audit department identified certain payments and gifts made by certain personnel in our China operations that may have violated the FCPA. Following this discovery, the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors initiated an independent investigation. We have made a voluntary disclosure to the DOJ and the SEC regarding the results of our investigation. We have also implemented additional policies and controls with respect to compliance with the FCPA. The FCPA and related statutes and regulations provide for potential monetary penalties, criminal sanctions and in some cases debarment from doing business with the U.S. federal government in connection with FCPA violations. We are cooperating with the DOJ and the SEC in connection with their review of the matter and are actively engaged in settlement discussions. Although no assurances can be given as to whether the matter will settle or the amount of any settlement, the Company recorded an accrual of $3.5 million in the third quarter of 2009 relating to the potential settlement of this matter. In June 2010, the Company met with officials from the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission to provide an update on the Company’s compliance with the FCPA. The management team expectsManagement is working diligently with both the DOJ and the SEC to haveobtain closure on this matter in the near future.matter.
     Economic conditions could materially adversely affect our business.

36


     The financial turmoil that first arose in the fall of 2008 has resulted in a tightening in the credit markets and a low level of liquidity in many financial markets. There could be a number of follow-on effects from the credit crisis on our business, including the insolvency of key suppliers or their inability to obtain credit to finance manufacturing of their products, resulting in product delays; inability of customers, including channel partners, to obtain credit to finance purchases of our products; and/or customer, including channel partner, insolvencies. Our operations and performance depend significantly on worldwide economic conditions. Uncertainty about current global economic conditions poses a risk as businesses and governments may postpone spending in response to tighter credit and/or negative financial news, which could have a material negative effect on demand for our products. Our operating results could also be adversely affected if the U.S. dollar strengthens against various foreign currencies.
     Political events, war, terrorism, natural disasters, and other circumstances could materially adversely affect us.
     War, terrorism, geopolitical uncertainties, and other business interruptions have caused and could cause damage or disruption to international commerce and the global economy, and thus could have a strong negative effect on us and our suppliers, logistics providers, manufacturing vendors, and customers, including channel partners. Our business operations are potentially subject to interruption by natural disasters, fire, power shortages, terrorist attacks and other hostile acts, and other events beyond our control. Such events could decrease demand for our products, make it difficult or impossible for us to make and deliver products to our customers, including channel partners, or to receive components from our suppliers, and create delays and inefficiencies in our supply chain.
Our future revenues are unpredictable, our operating results are likely to fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter, and if we fail to meet the expectations of securities analysts or investors, our stock price could decline significantly.
     Our quarterly and annual operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to fluctuate significantly in the future due to a variety of factors, some of which are outside of our control. Accordingly, we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of operations are not meaningful and should not be relied upon as indications of future performance. Some of the factors that could cause our quarterly or annual operating results to fluctuate include significant shortfalls in revenue relative to our planned expenditures, changes in budget allocations by the federal government for homeland security purposes, changes in world-wide energy production and refining, market acceptance of our products, ongoing product development and production, competitive pressures and customer retention. It is likely that in some future quarters our operating results may fall below the expectations of investors. In this event, the trading price of our common stock could significantly decline.

32


We may have difficulty achieving and sustaining profitability and may experience additional losses in the future. If we continue to report losses or are marginally profitable, the financial impact of future events may be magnified and may lead to a disproportionate impact on the trading price of our stock.
     Although we reported net income of $1.6$0.1 million for the sixnine months ended JuneSeptember 30, 2010, we recorded net losses of $5.8 million, $7.2 million and $14.7 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. In order to improve our profitability, we will need to continue to generate new sales while controlling our costs. As we plan on continuing the growth of our business while implementing cost control measures, we may not be able to successfully generate enough revenues to sustain profitability. Any failure to increase our revenues and control costs as we pursue our planned growth would harm our profitability and would likely result in a negative effect on the market price of our stock. Our financial results have historically bordered at or near profitability, and if we continue to perform at this level, the financial impact may be magnified and we may experience a disproportionate impact on our trading price as a result. If we again incur losses in the future, any particular financial event could result in a relatively large change in our financial results that could be the difference between us having a profit or a loss for a particular quarter in which it occurs.
We may require additional capital in the future, which may not be available or may only be available on unfavorable terms.
     Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including potential future acquisitions and our ability to generate revenue and control costs. Should we have the need to raise additional capital, we might not be able to do so at all or on favorable terms. In the case of any future equity financings, dilution to our shareholders could result and, in any case, such securities may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to those of our common stock. If we are unable to obtain needed capital on favorable terms, or at all, our business and results of operations could be harmed and our liquidity could be adversely affected.
The market for gas and radiation detection monitoring devices is highly competitive, and if we cannot compete effectively, our business may be harmed.

37


     The market for gas and radiation detection monitoring devices is highly competitive. Competitors in the gas and radiation monitoring industry differentiate themselves on the basis of their technology, quality of product and service offerings, cost and time to market. Our primary competitors in the gas detection market include Industrial Scientific Corporation, Mine Safety Appliances Company, Honeywell, Ion Science, Draeger Safety Inc., Gastec Corporation and Sperian Protection. Our competitors in the radiation market include Canberra, Exporanium, ICx, MGP Polimaster Ltd., Santa Barbara Systems, Smiths Detection, ThermoFisher and TSA Limited. Several of our competitors such as Mine Safety Appliances Company, Draeger Safety Inc. and Smiths have longer operating histories, larger customer bases, greater brand recognition and significantly greater financial and marketing resources than we do. In addition, some of our competitors may be able to:
  devote greater resources to marketing and promotional campaigns;
 
  adopt more aggressive pricing policies; or
 
  devote more resources to technology and systems development.
In light of these factors, we may be unable to compete successfully.
We may not be successful in the development or introduction of new products and services in a timely and effective manner and, consequently, we may not be able to remain competitive and the results of operations may suffer.
     Our revenue growth is dependent on the timely introduction of new products to market. We may be unsuccessful in identifying new product and service opportunities or in developing or marketing new products and services in a timely or cost-effective manner. In developing new products, we may be required to make significant investments before we can determine the commercial viability of the new product. If we fail to accurately foresee our customers’ needs and future activities, we may invest heavily in research and development of products that do not lead to significant sales.

33


     We have expanded our current business of providing gas detection instruments to include radiation detection and wireless systems for local and remote security monitoring. While we perceive a large market for such products, the radiation detection and wireless systems markets are still evolving, and we have little basis to assess the demand for these products and services or to evaluate whether our products and services will be accepted by the market. If our radiation detection products and wireless products and services do not gain broad market acceptance or if we do not continue to maintain the necessary technology, our business and results of operations will be harmed.
     In addition, compliance with safety regulations, specifically the need to obtain regulatory approvals in certain jurisdictions, could delay the introduction of new products by us. As a result, we may experience delays in realizing revenues from our new products.
The securities laws and regulations have and are likely to continue to have a significant effect on our costs.
     The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”) and the rules promulgated by the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange in relation thereto require significant legal, financial and accounting compliance costs, and we expect these costs to continue indefinitely.
In the event we are unable to satisfy regulatory requirements relating to internal control over financial reporting or, if these controls are not effective, our business and financial results may suffer.
     In designing and evaluating our internal control over financial reporting, we recognize that any internal control or procedure, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving desired control objectives. For example, a company’s operations may change over time as the result of new or discontinued lines of business and management must periodically modify a company’s internal controls and procedures to timely match these changes in its business. In addition, management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures and company personnel are required to use judgment in their application. While we continue to improve upon our internal control over financial reporting, so that it can provide reasonable assurance of achieving its control objectives, no system of internal controls can be designed to provide absolute assurance of effectiveness.
     Material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting may materially impact our reported financial results and the market price of our stock could significantly decline. Additionally, adverse publicity related to a material failure of internal control over financial reporting could have a negative impact on our reputation and business.

38


We are subject to risks and uncertainties of the government marketplace, including the risk that the government may not fund projects that our products are designed to address and that certain terms of our contracts with government agencies may subject us to adverse government actions or penalties.
     Some of our customers, such as first responders, rely to some extent on government grants to purchase our products. Decisions on what types of projects are to be funded by local, state and federal government agencies may have a material impact on our business. The Federal budget for the Department of Homeland Security, which we refer to as “Homeland Security” herein, is a source for funding for many of our customers either directly or through grants to state and local agencies. However, if the government does not fund projects that our products are designed to address, or funds such projects at levels lower than we expect, our business and results of operations will be harmed.
     From time-to-time we enter into government contracts that contain provisions which subject us to laws and regulations that provide government clients with rights and remedies not typically found in commercial contracts. For example, a portion of our federal contracting has been done through our distributors who are on the Federal Supply Schedules from the United States General Services Administration (GSA). GSA Schedule contracts which we may enter into often include a clause known as the “Price Reductions” clause; the terms of that clause are similar but not identical to a “most favored customer” clause in commercial contracts. Under that clause, we may agree that the prices to the government under the GSA Schedules contract will maintain a constant relationship to the prices charged to certain commercial customers, i.e., when prices to those benchmark customers drop, our prices on our GSA Schedules contract must be adjusted accordingly. Although when we are party to these contracts we undertake extensive efforts to comply with the Price Reductions clause, it is possible that we may have an unreported discount offered to a “Basis of Award” customer and may have failed to honor the obligations of the Price Reductions clause. If that occurs, we could, under certain circumstances, be subject to an audit, an action in fraud, or other adverse government actions or penalties.

3439


We may not be successful in promoting and developing our brand, which could prevent us from remaining competitive.
     We believe that our future success will depend on our ability to maintain and strengthen the RAE Systems brand, which will depend, in turn, largely on the success of our marketing efforts and ability to provide our customers with high-quality products. If we fail to successfully promote and maintain our brand, or incur excessive expenses in attempting to promote and maintain our brand, our business will be harmed.
We may face risks from our substantial international operations and sales.
     We have significant operations in foreign countries, including manufacturing facilities, sales personnel and customer support operations. For the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, approximately 41% and 43% of our revenues, respectively, were from sales to customers located in Asia and approximately 17% and 16% of our revenues, respectively, were from sales to customers located in Europe. We have manufacturing facilities in China and in the United States. A significant portion of our products and components are manufactured at our facility in Shanghai, China.
     Our international operations are subject to economic and other risks inherent in doing business in foreign countries, including the following:
  difficulties with staffing and managing international operations;
 
  transportation and supply chain disruptions and increased transportation expense as a result of epidemics, terrorist activity, acts of war or hostility, increased security and less developed infrastructure;
 
  economic slowdown and/or downturn in foreign markets;
 
  international currency fluctuations;
 
  political and economic uncertainty caused by epidemics, terrorism or acts of war or hostility;
 
  legislative and regulatory responses to terrorist activity such as increased restrictions on cross-border movement of products and technology;
 
  legislative, regulatory, police, or civil responses to epidemics or other outbreaks of infectious diseases such as quarantines, factory closures, or increased restrictions on transportation or travel;
 
  increased costs and complexities associated with complying with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002;
 
  general strikes or other disruptions in working conditions;
 
  labor shortages;
 
  political instability;
 
  changes in tariffs;
 
  generally longer periods to collect receivables;
 
  unexpected legislative or regulatory requirements;
 
  reduced protection for intellectual property rights in some countries;
 
  significant unexpected duties or taxes or other adverse tax consequences;
 
  difficulty in obtaining export licenses and other trade barriers; and
ability to obtain credit and access to capital issues faced by our international customers.

3540


ability to obtain credit and access to capital issues faced by our international customers.
     The specific economic conditions in each country will impact our future international sales. For example, approximately half of our recognized revenue has been denominated in U.S. dollars. Significant downward fluctuations in currency exchange rates against the U.S. dollar could result in higher product prices and/or declining margins and increased manufacturing costs. If we do not effectively manage the risks associated with international operations and sales, our business, financial condition and operating results could suffer.
     Like other companies operating or selling internationally, we are subject to the FCPA and other laws which prohibit improper payments or offers of payments to foreign governments and their officials and political parties by U.S. and other business entities for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We make sales in countries known to experience corruption. Our sales activities in such countries create the risk of unauthorized payments or offers of payments by one of our employees, consultants, sales agents or distributors which could be in violation of various laws including the FCPA, even though such parties are not always subject to our control. We have implemented new policies and procedures to prevent losses from such practices and to discourage such practices by our employees, consultants, sales agents and distributors and are continuing our efforts to improve such policies and procedures. Among other things, we have established on-going training programs for our employees to ensure that they are aware of their responsibilities under the FCPA and similar laws. However, our existing safeguards and any improvements may prove to be less than effective and our employees, consultants, sales agents or distributors may engage in conduct for which we might be held responsible. Violations of the FCPA may result in severe criminal or civil sanctions, and we may be subject to other liabilities, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The loss of “Normal Trade Relation” status for China, changes in current tariff structures or adoption of other trade policies adverse to China could have an adverse effect on our business.
     Our ability to import products from China at current tariff levels could be materially and adversely affected if the “normal trade relations” (“NTR”, formerly “most favored nation”) status the United States government has granted to China for trade and tariff purposes is terminated. As a result of its NTR status, China receives the same favorable tariff treatment that the United States extends to its other “normal” trading partners. China’s NTR status, coupled with its membership in the World Trade Organization, could eventually reduce barriers to manufacturing products in and exporting products from China. However, we cannot provide any assurance that China’s membership in the World Trade Organization or NTR status will not change. As a result of opposition to certain policies of the Chinese government and China’s growing trade surpluses with the United States, there has been, and in the future may be, opposition to NTR status for China. Also, the imposition of trade sanctions by the United States or the European Union against a class of products imported by us from, or the loss of NTR status with, China, could significantly increase our cost of products imported into the United States or Europe and harm our business. For example, in September 2009, the U.S. government imposed new tariffs on tires imported from China. Retaliatory actions by China could be harmful to our business. Because of the importance of our international sales and international sourcing of manufacturing to our business, our financial condition and results of operations could be significantly and adversely affected if any of the risks described above were to occur.
The government of China may change or even reverse its policies of promoting private industry and foreign investment, in which case our assets and operations may be at risk.
     We currently manufacture and sell a significant portion of our components and products in China. Our existing and planned operations in China are subject to the general risks of doing business internationally and the specific risks related to the business, economic and political conditions in China, which include the possibility that the central government of China will change or even reverse its policies of promoting private industry and foreign investment in China. Many of the current reforms which support private business in China are unprecedented or experimental. Other political, economic and social factors, such as political changes, changes in the rates of economic growth, unemployment or inflation, or in the disparities of per capita wealth among citizens of China and between regions within China, could also lead to further readjustment of the government’s reform measures. It is not possible to predict whether the Chinese government will continue to be as supportive of private business in China, nor is it possible to predict how future reforms will affect our business.

36


Any failure to adequately protect and enforce our intellectual property rights could harm our business.
     We regard our intellectual property as critical to our success. We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret laws and non-disclosure agreements and confidentiality procedures to protect our proprietary rights. Notwithstanding these laws, we may be unsuccessful in protecting our intellectual property rights or in obtaining patents or registered trademarks for which we apply. Although processes are in place to protect our intellectual property rights, we cannot guarantee that these procedures are

41


adequate to prevent misappropriation of our current technology or that our competitors will not develop technology that is similar to our own.
     While there is no single patent or license to technology of material significance to the Company, our ability to compete is affected by our ability to protect our intellectual property rights in general. For example, we have a collection of patents related to our photoionization detector technology, the first of which expires in 2012, and our ability to compete may be affected by any competing similar or new technology. In addition, if we lose the licensing rights to a patented or other proprietary technology, we may need to stop selling products incorporating that technology and possibly other products, redesign our products or lose a competitive advantage. We cannot ensure that our future patent applications will be approved or that our current patents will not be challenged by third parties. Furthermore, we cannot ensure that, if challenged, our patents will be found to be valid and enforceable. Any litigation relating to our intellectual property rights could, regardless of the outcome, have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.
We may face intellectual property infringement claims that might be costly to resolve and affect our results of operations.
     In connection with the enforcement of our own intellectual property rights, the acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights or disputes relating to the validity or alleged infringement of third-party rights, including patent rights, we have been, are currently and may in the future be subject to claims, negotiations or complex, protracted litigation. Intellectual property disputes and litigation are typically very costly and can be disruptive to our business operations by diverting the attention and energies of management and key technical personnel. Although we have successfully defended or resolved past litigation and disputes, we may not prevail in any ongoing or future litigation and disputes. We may incur significant costs in acquiring the necessary third party intellectual property rights for use in our products. Third party intellectual property disputes could subject us to significant liabilities, require us to enter into royalty and licensing arrangements on less favorable terms, prevent us from manufacturing or licensing certain of our products, cause severe disruptions to our operations or the markets in which we compete, or require us to satisfy indemnification commitments with our customers including contractual provisions under various license arrangements, any one of which could seriously harm our business. For example, for the last several years we have been involved in a dispute with Polimaster Ltd. which required us to incur substantial professional fees. Although we ultimately prevailed, it is uncertain whether we will be able to recover any of the amounts awarded to us.
Some of our products may be subject to product liability claims which could be costly to resolve and affect our results of operations.
     There can be no assurance that we will not be subject to third-party claims in connection with our products or that any indemnification or insurance available to us will be adequate to protect us from liability. A product liability claim, product recall or other claim, as well as any claims for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
We sell a majority of our products through distributors, and if our distributors stop selling our products, our revenues would suffer.
     We distribute our products in the Americas, Europe, Asia Pacific and the Middle East primarily through distributors. We are dependent upon these distributors to sell our products and to assist us in promoting and creating a demand for our products. Distributors are an important sales channel for our future growth. If one or more of our distributors were to experience financial difficulties or become unwilling to promote and sell our products for any reason, including any refusal to renew their commitment as our distributor, we might not be able to replace such lost revenue, and our business and results of operations could be materially harmed.

37


Because we purchase a significant portion of our component parts from a limited number of third party suppliers, we are subject to the risk that we may be unable to acquire quality components in a timely manner, which could result in delays of product shipments and damage our business and operating results.
     We currently purchase component parts used in the manufacture of our products from a limited number of third party suppliers. We depend on these suppliers to meet our needs for various sensors, microprocessors and other material components. Moreover, we depend on the quality of the products supplied to us over which we have limited control. Should we encounter shortages and delays in obtaining components, we might not be able to supply products in a timely manner due to a lack of components, and our business could be adversely affected.

42


Future acquisitions that we undertake could be difficult to integrate, disrupt our business, dilute shareholder value or harm our results of operations.
     In the last several years, we increased our ownership of RAE Beijing to 96%, acquired Aegison Corporation and Tianjin Securay Technology Co., Ltd. and formed RAE Fushun, of which we retain 70% ownership. In August 2007, we determined to discontinue the Aegison and Securay businesses. In the third quarter of 2010, we recorded an impairment charge of $1.5 million to write off the carrying charge of the customer list for RAE Fushun (see Note 2 of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements). We recently informed our board of directors of our intention to exercise a disciplined exit from our investment in RAE Fushun as the performance of this business has not met our long-term growth expectations.
     We may acquire or make additional investments in complementary businesses, technologies, services or products if appropriate opportunities arise. The process of integrating any acquired business, technology, service or product into our business and operations may result in unforeseen operating difficulties and expenditures. Integration of an acquired company also may consume much of our management’s time and attention that would otherwise be available for ongoing development of our business. Moreover, the anticipated benefits of any acquisition may not be realized. Future acquisitions could result in dilutive issuances of equity securities or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or expenses related to goodwill recognition and other intangible assets, any of which could harm our business.
Our ownership interest in Renex will cause us to incur losses that we would not otherwise incur.
     We currently own approximately 40% of Renex, a wireless systems company. We are required to incorporate our share of its expenses as losses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. If Renex does not begin to generate revenues at the level we
anticipate or otherwise incurs greater losses, we could incur greater losses than we anticipate and our results of operations will suffer.
Our business could suffer if we lose the services of any of our executive officers.
     Our future success depends to a significant extent on the continued service of our executive officers. We have no formal employment agreements with any of our executives other than the initial offer letter, if applicable. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers could harm our business. We do not have key person life insurance on any of our personnel.
Our officers and directors beneficially own approximately 31% of our common stock and, accordingly, may exert substantial influence over the Company.
     Our executive officers and directors, in the aggregate, beneficially own approximately 31% of our common stock as of JuneSeptember 30, 2010. These stockholders acting together have the ability to substantially influence all matters requiring approval by our stockholders. These matters include the election and removal of the directors, amendment of our certificate of incorporation, and any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. In addition, they may dictate the management of our business and affairs. Furthermore, this concentration of ownership could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control, or impeding a merger or consolidation, takeover or other business combination and may substantially reduce the marketability of our common stock.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
None
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None

38


Item 4. Reserved
Item 5. Other Information
None

43


Item 6. Exhibits
     The following is a list of exhibits filed as part of this Report on Form 10-Q.
   
Exhibit  
Number Description of Document
31.1 Certification of Robert I. Chen, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
31.2 Certification of Randall Gausman, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
32.1 Certification of Robert I. Chen, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
32.2 Certification of Randall Gausman, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

3944


SIGNATURES
     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
August 6,November 5, 2010
     
 RAE SYSTEMS INC.
 
 
 By:  /s/ Randall Gausman   
  Randall Gausman  
  Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer 
 

4045


Exhibit Index
   
Exhibit  
Number Description of Document
31.1 Certification of Robert I. Chen, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
31.2 Certification of Randall Gausman, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) adopted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
32.1 Certification of Robert I. Chen, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
32.2 Certification of Randall Gausman, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, furnished pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

4146