We operate in two segments: the solar and semiconductor equipment segment and the polishing supplies segment. Our solar and semiconductor equipment segment is a leading supplier of thermal processing systems, including related automation, parts and services, to the solar/photovoltaic, semiconductor, silicon wafer and MEMS industries.
Our polishing supplies and equipment segment is a leading supplier of wafer carriers to manufacturers of silicon wafers. The polishing segment also manufactures polishing templates, steel carriers and double-sided polishing and lapping machines for fabricators of optics, quartz, ceramics and metal parts, and for manufacturers of medical equipment components.
Our customers are primarily manufacturers of solar cells and integrated circuits. The solar cell and semiconductor industries are cyclical and historically have experienced significant fluctuations. Our revenue is impacted by these broad industry trends.
Due to the nature of the capital equipment markets that we serve, our revenues, gross margins and operating results have historically fluctuated on a quarterly basis. Our contracts typically include holdbacks of 10-20% of revenue, which are recognized at the time of customer acceptance.
The following table sets forth certain operational data as a percentage of net revenue for the periods indicated:
| | Three Months Ended | | Nine Months Ended |
| | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | |
| | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % |
| | (dollars in thousands) | | | | | (dollars in thousands) | | | |
Solar and Semiconductor | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equipment Segment | | $ | 11,458 | | $ | 22,138 | | $ | (10,680 | ) | | (48 | %) | | $ | 36,931 | | $ | 47,743 | | $ | (10,812 | ) | | (23 | %) |
Polishing Supplies Segment | | | 1,070 | | | 2,009 | | | (939 | ) | | (47 | %) | | | 4,373 | | | 5,736 | | | (1,363 | ) | | (24 | %) |
Total Net Revenue | | $ | 12,528 | | $ | 24,147 | | $ | (11,619 | ) | | (48 | %) | | $ | 41,304 | | $ | 53,479 | | $ | (12,175 | ) | | (23 | %) |
Net revenue for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 decreased $11.6 million, or 48%, compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2008. Revenue from the Solar and Semiconductor Equipment Segment decreased $10.7 million, or 48%, due to significantly lower shipments to the solar industry, partially offset by an increase in recognition of previously deferred revenue. The decrease in net revenue from the solar industry was driven by the global economic downturn and credit crisis resulting in delays in many of our customers’ capacity expansion plans. The decrease of $0.9 million, or 47%, in net revenue from the Polishing Supplies Segment was due to lower sales volume of polishing machines, insert carriers and templates caused mainly by the downturn in the semiconductor industry.
Net revenue for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 decreased by $12.2 million, or 23%, compared to the nine months ended June 30, 2008. Revenue from the Solar and Semiconductor Equipment Segment decreased $10.8 million, or 23%, due to the economic downturn as described above. The decrease of $1.4 million, or 24%, in net revenue from the Polishing Supplies Segment is also due to the economic downturn as described above.
The ongoing global credit crisis and related downturn in the global economy has caused many of our customers to delay or suspend their capacity expansion plans, which has resulted in lower orders. In addition, some of our customers have, and others may, request delays or cancellations in the shipment of their orders. A continuation of the global credit crisis and related downturn in the global economy are likely to negatively impact future revenues from both solar and semiconductor markets and could have a significant adverse affect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Backlog and Orders
Our order backlog as of June 30, 2009 and 2008 was $29.7 million and $60.1 million, respectively. Our backlog as of June 30, 2009 includes approximately $27.1 million of orders from our solar industry customers compared to $44.2 million at June 30, 2008. New orders booked in the quarter ended June 30, 2009 were $5.3 million compared to $20.2 million in the third quarter of fiscal 2008. New orders booked in the nine-month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 were $22.1 million and $83.8 million, respectively. As the majority of the backlog is denominated in euros, the strengthening of the dollar during the first three quarters of fiscal 2009 resulted in a reduction in backlog of approximately $2.0 million. The decrease in new orders and backlog is due primarily to the ongoing global credit crisis and related economic downturn. This has caused many of our customers to delay or suspend their capacity expansion plans. Total bookings are expected to remain noticeably lower than prior year quarters at least until the lingering global economic downturn improves.
The orders included in our backlog are generally credit approved customer purchase orders expected to ship within the next twelve months. Because our orders are typically subject to cancellation or delay by the customer, our backlog at any particular point in time is not necessarily representative of actual sales for succeeding periods, nor is backlog any assurance that we will realize profit from completing these orders. Our backlog also includes revenue deferred pursuant to our revenue recognition policy, derived from orders that have already been shipped, but which have not met the criteria for revenue recognition. Our backlog as of June 30, 2009 includes $1.2 million of deferred revenue for which there is an equal amount of deferred costs, i.e. with no gross profit to be realized.
As of June 30, 2009, two customer’s individually account for 44% and 42% of our order backlog, respectively. The customer representing 44% of the order backlog has delayed shipment for some of its orders beginning in the second quarter of the current fiscal year. Further delays by this customer of the shipment of a significant portion of these orders past December 31, 2009 could have a significant adverse effect on the results of operations during fiscal 2010.
Gross Profit and Gross Margin
Gross profit is the difference between net revenue and cost of goods sold. Cost of goods sold consists of purchased material, labor and overhead to manufacture equipment and spare parts and the cost of service and support to customers for warranty, installation and paid service calls. Gross margin is gross profit as a percent of net revenue.
20
| | Three Months Ended | | Nine Months Ended |
| | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | |
| | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % |
| | (dollars in thousands) | | | | | (dollars in thousands) | | | |
Solar and Semiconductor | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equipment Segment | | $ | 3,283 | | | $ | 6,457 | | | $ | (3,174 | ) | | (49 | %) | | $ | 11,127 | | | $ | 12,971 | | | $ | (1,844 | ) | | (14 | %) |
Polishing Supplies Segment | | | 299 | | | | 621 | | | | (322 | ) | | (52 | %) | | | 898 | | | | 1,794 | | | | (896 | ) | | (50 | %) |
Total Gross Profit | | $ | 3,582 | | | $ | 7,078 | | | $ | (3,496 | ) | | (49 | %) | | $ | 12,025 | | | $ | 14,765 | | | $ | (2,740 | ) | | (19 | %) |
Gross margin | | | 29 | % | | | 29 | % | | | | | | | | | | 29 | % | | | 28 | % | | | | | | | |
Gross profit for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 decreased $3.5 million or 49% from $7.1 million in the third quarter of fiscal 2008 to $3.6 million in the third quarter of fiscal 2009. Consolidated gross margin and that of the Solar and Semiconductor Segment in the quarters ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 was 29%. We recognized $0.6 million of previously deferred profit for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, net of deferrals, compared to a net deferral of $1.8 million of profit for the quarter ended June 30, 2008. Excluding the impact of the change in deferred revenue and profit, gross margin in the Solar and Semiconductor Equipment Segment decreased to 25% in the third quarter of fiscal 2009 versus 34% in the third quarter of fiscal 2008, due primarily to lower production and shipment volumes and the related reduction in efficiencies and plant utilization. Gross profit and margins in the Polishing Supplies Segment decreased due to lower volumes of polishing machines, carriers and templates.
Gross profit for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 decreased $2.7 million or 19% to $12.0 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2009 from $14.8 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2008. Gross margin increased to 29% in the first nine months of fiscal 2009 from 28% in the first nine months of fiscal 2008. We recognized $0.3 million of previously deferred profit for the nine months ended June 30, 2009, net of deferrals, compared to a net deferral of $1.6 million of profit for the nine months ended June 30, 2008. Excluding the impact of deferred revenue and profit activity, gross margin in the Solar and Semiconductor Equipment Segment decreased to 28% in the first nine months of fiscal 2009 from 30% in the first nine months of fiscal 2008 due primarily to lower efficiencies and plant utilization experienced in the second and third quarters of fiscal 2009 In the first nine months of fiscal 2009, we deferred revenue included $1.1 million with an equal amount of deferred cost.
Gross profit and gross margin in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 will be significantly influenced by the amount of deferred profit recognized during the period. The remaining amount of deferred profit is expected to decline significantly during the fourth quarter of this fiscal year, which combined with the potential for lower shipments associated with the decline in new order bookings could materially and adversely affect gross profit and gross margins in 2010.
Selling, General and Administrative
Selling, general and administrative expenses consist of the cost of employees, consultants and contractors, facility costs, sales commissions, promotional marketing expenses, legal and accounting expenses.
| | Three Months Ended | | Nine Months Ended |
| | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | |
| | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % |
| | (dollars in thousands) | | | | | (dollars in thousands) | | | |
Solar and Semiconductor | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equipment Segment | | $ | 3,432 | | | $ | 4,482 | | | $ | (1,050 | ) | | (23 | %) | | $ | 10,348 | | | $ | 11,030 | | | $ | (682 | ) | | (6 | %) |
Polishing Supplies Segment | | | 301 | | | | 365 | | | | (64 | ) | | (18 | %) | | | 970 | | | | 1,085 | | | | (115 | ) | | (11 | %) |
Total SG&A | | $ | 3,733 | | | $ | 4,847 | | | $ | (1,114 | ) | | (23 | %) | | $ | 11,318 | | | $ | 12,115 | | | $ | (797 | ) | | (7 | %) |
Percent of net revenue | | | 30 | % | | | 20 | % | | | | | | | | | | 28 | % | | | 23 | % | | | | | | | |
Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses for the three months ended June 30, 2009 decreased $1.1 million, or 23%, to $3.7 million from $4.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2008. SG&A expenses include $0.2 million and $0.1 million of stock-based compensation expense in the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The decrease in SG&A expenses was due primarily to a $0.7 million of decrease in selling expense, primarily commissions, related to lower revenues generated in regions where third party sales agents are utilized. General and administrative expenses decreased $0.4 million due primarily to lower accruals for incentive compensation, offset by the increases in stock-based compensation expense.
21
For the nine months ended June 30, 2009, SG&A decreased $0.8 million or 7% compared to the nine month period ended June 30, 2008. SG&A expenses include $0.5 million and $0.4 million of stock-based compensation expense for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, respectively. SG&A expenses for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 include $0.1 million and $0.3 million, respectively, of costs related to compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Selling expenses decreased $0.7 million due to reductions in force at our Bruce operations and decreased commissions. General and administrative expenses decreased $0.1 million due primarily to lower compensation expense, offset by the increases in stock-based compensation expense.
Impairment and Restructuring Charge
The Bruce operations are primarily dependent upon a mature segment of the semiconductor industry which is experiencing a significant downturn. The industry downturn resulted in recent operating losses and deterioration in forecasted revenue and earnings at Bruce. It is uncertain when, and to what extent, the markets served by Bruce will recover. Therefore, the Bruce operations were restructured in the second quarter of fiscal 2009 to focus primarily on a parts supply business versus furnace systems sales. The restructuring included a reduction in the number of employees and a reduction in the amount of space required to operate the business. The restructuring resulted in a charge of $620,000 in the second quarter of fiscal 2009, which includes a $350,000 charge for unutilized leased space, a $160,000 write-off of furnace-related inventory parts that are not expected to be utilized in the future and $110,000 of severance and outplacement costs. Our Bruce Technologies operations were also reorganized in the third quarter of fiscal 2008, which resulted in a restructuring charge of $0.3 million, consisting mainly of severance and outplacement costs for affected personnel.
Due to the circumstances related to the Bruce operations discussed above, the Company determined it was necessary to conduct an assessment of the ability to recover the carrying amount of long-lived assets of the Bruce operations. The amount estimated to be recoverable is based upon the Company’s judgments and estimates of undiscounted cash flows during the estimated remaining useful life of the assets. It was determined that the carrying value of the net assets was not fully recoverable; therefore, an impairment charge of $373,000 was recorded in the second quarter of fiscal 2009 for the excess of carrying value over the fair value of the customer list and non-compete agreement. Future adverse changes could be caused by, among other factors, a downturn in the industries served, a general economic slowdown, reduced demand for our products in the marketplace, poor operating results, the inability to protect intellectual property or changing technologies and product obsolescence.
As a result of the impairment of long-lived assets described above, it was necessary to conduct an interim review of the goodwill and Bruce trademark for impairment. The fair value of the assets group was determined through estimates of the present value of future cash flows based upon the anticipated future use of the assets. As the carrying value of the Bruce assets exceeded their estimated fair value, the carrying values of goodwill ($89,000) and the Bruce trademark ($592,000) were also recorded as an impairment charge in the second quarter of fiscal 2009.
The total amount of the impairment charge was $1.1 million. Details of the impairment charge are as follows:
| | Gross | | | | | Net |
| | Carrying | | Accumulated | | Carrying |
| | Amount | | Amortization | | Amount |
| | (dollars in thousands) |
Goodwill | | $ | 89 | | $ | - | | $ | 89 |
Trademark | | | 592 | | | - | | | 592 |
Customer list | | | 276 | | | 87 | | | 189 |
Non-compete agreement | | | 350 | | | 166 | | | 184 |
Impairment Charge | | | | | | | | $ | 1,054 |
Research and Development
Research and development expenses consist of the cost of employees, consultants and contractors who design, engineer and develop new products and processes; materials and supplies used in those activities; and product prototyping.
22
| | Three Months Ended | | Nine Months Ended |
| | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | | |
| | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | % |
| | (dollars in thousands) | | | | | (dollars in thousands) | | | |
Solar and Semiconductor | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Equipment Segment | | $ | 151 | | $ | 210 | | $ | (59 | ) | | (28 | %) | | $ | 527 | | $ | 686 | | $ | (159 | ) | | (23 | %) |
Polishing Supplies Segment | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 0 | % | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 0 | % |
Total R&D | | $ | 151 | | $ | 210 | | $ | (59 | ) | | (28 | %) | | $ | 527 | | $ | 686 | | $ | (159 | ) | | (23 | %) |
Research and development costs for the three and nine months ended June 30, 2009 decreased $0.1 million and $0.2 million, respectively, compared to the three and nine month periods ended June 30, 2008. The decrease is due primarily to increased reimbursements through governmental research and development grants which are netted against these expenses.
Interest and other income (expense), net
Interest and other income (expense), net includes mainly interest income, interest expense and gains and losses on foreign currency transactions. Interest income represents earnings on invested funds. Interest expense primarily consists of interest incurred on equipment financing.
| | Three Months Ended | | Nine Months Ended |
Interest and other | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. | | June 30, | | June 30, | | Inc. |
income (expense), net | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) | | 2009 | | 2008 | | (Dec) |
| | (dollars in thousands) | | (dollars in thousands) |
Interest and other income | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(expense), net | | $ | (4 | ) | | $ | 169 | | $ | (173 | ) | | $ | 54 | | | $ | 673 | | $ | (619 | ) |
Foreign currency gains | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
(losses) | | | (29 | ) | | | 79 | | | (108 | ) | | | (40 | ) | | | 76 | | | (116 | ) |
Total | | $ | (33 | ) | | $ | 248 | | $ | (281 | ) | | $ | 14 | | | $ | 749 | | $ | (735 | ) |
Interest income on invested funds decreased due to lower interest rates during fiscal 2009. Foreign currency gains or losses were less than $0.1 million in each reporting period.
Income Taxes
During the three months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we recorded income tax expense (benefit) of ($0.1) million and $0.8 million, for an effective tax rate of 30% and 40%, respectively. During the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008, we recorded income tax expense (benefit) of ($0.1) million and $0.9 million. The income tax provision for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and June 30, 2008 is based on the estimated annual effective tax rate for the entire year and changes in the valuation allowance on deferred tax assets in existence at the beginning of the fiscal year. These estimated annual effective tax rates are adjusted at the end of each interim quarter, based on our estimates for the fiscal year of pretax income or loss, permanent differences, statutory tax rates and changes in those deferred tax assets for which we have established a valuation allowance, and tax planning strategies in the various jurisdictions in which the Company operates. The resulting effective tax rates reflected in the statement of operations for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and June 30, 2008 were approximately 7% and 40%, respectively. The effective tax rate for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 was negatively impacted by an increase in the valuation allowance and permanent differences between financial income and taxable income, which were higher in relation to the pre-tax loss. Without these adjustments a larger tax benefit would have been recorded for the period.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008, cash and cash equivalents and current restricted cash were $40.4 million and $39.5 million, respectively. The increase in cash was primarily provided by cash from operations of $4.8 million. This was offset by purchases of property, plant and equipment and payments for licensing agreements and repurchases of common stock. In the first quarter of fiscal 2009 we terminated our line of credit in the amount of Euro 1.0 million (approximately $1.3 million). Our working capital as of June 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 was $56.4 million and $58.3 million, respectively. Our ratio of current assets to current liabilities increased to 4.5:1 as of June 30, 2009 from 3.2:1 as of September 30, 2008. We believe that our principal sources of liquidity discussed above are sufficient to meet our anticipated needs for current operations for at least the next 12 months.
23
The success of our growth strategy is dependent upon the availability of additional capital resources on terms satisfactory to management. Our sources of capital in the past have included capital leases, long-term debt and the sale of equity securities, which include common and preferred stock sold in private transactions and public offerings. There can be no assurance that we can raise such additional capital resources on satisfactory terms.
In December 2008, the Board of Directors approved a stock repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up to $4 million of common stock. Under the program, shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market transactions at prevailing market prices or in privately negotiated purchases. The timing and actual number of future purchases of shares will depend on a variety of factors, such as price, corporate and regulatory requirements, alternative investment opportunities, and other market and economic conditions. Repurchases under the program are funded from available working capital. The program may be suspended or terminated at any time, or from time-to-time at management’s discretion without prior notice.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Cash provided by our operating activities was $4.8 million for the nine months ended June 30, 2009, compared to $3.8 million used in such activities for the nine months ended June 30, 2008. In the first nine months of fiscal 2009, cash was generated by decreases in accounts receivable, inventories and current restricted cash as well as earnings from operations, adjusted for non-cash charges, partially offset by decreases in accounts payable, accrued liabilities and customer deposits. During the nine months ended June 30, 2008 cash was primarily used to finance increases in inventory, accounts receivable, prepaid and other assets. This use of cash was partially offset by increases in accounts payable, accrued liabilities and customer deposits.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Our investing activities for the nine months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008 used $1.8 million and $10.9 million respectively. For the nine months ended June 30, 2009, capital expenditures amounted to $1.1 million primarily for machinery and equipment and we made $0.8 million of payments for our licensing agreements with PST. For nine months ended June 30, 2008, we used cash of $8.1 million related to the acquisition of R2D. Capital expenditures in the same period were $2.4 million, primarily related to the improvements of our facilities in The Netherlands.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
For the nine months ended June 30, 2009, $0.6 million of cash was used in financing activities for the repurchase of shares ($0.4 million) and for the payment of long-term debt of $0.1 million. In the first nine months of fiscal 2008 cash of $33.9 million was provided by the sale of 2,500,000 shares of common stock in an underwritten public offering at a price to the public of $14.41 per share. Payments of long-term debt amounted to $0.7 million in the first nine months of fiscal 2008.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of June 30, 2009, Amtech had no off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4) of Regulation S-K promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Contractual Obligations
The only significant changes in contractual obligations since September 30, 2008 have been changes in purchase obligations and additional obligations related to newly licensed products (See Note 7 of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements). Refer to Amtech’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008, for information on the Company’s other contractual obligations
24
Critical Accounting Policies
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations discuss our consolidated financial statements that have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.
On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments, including those related to revenue recognition, inventory valuation, accounts receivable collectability, warranty and impairment of long-lived assets. We base our estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. The results of these estimates and judgments form the basis for making conclusions about the timing and amounts of revenue, costs and expenses to be recognized and the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
A critical accounting policy is one that is both important to the presentation of our financial position and results of operations, and requires management’s most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. These uncertainties are discussed in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2008. We believe the following critical accounting policies affect the more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue Recognition.We review product and service sales contracts with multiple deliverables to determine if separate units of accounting are present in the arrangements. Where separate units of accounting exist, revenue is allocated to delivered items equal to the total sales price less the greater of the relative fair value of the undelivered items, and all contingent portions of the sales arrangement.
We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; the product has been delivered and title has transferred, or services have been rendered; the seller’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable; and collectability is reasonably assured. For us, this policy generally results in revenue recognition at the following points:
- For the solar and semiconductor equipment segment, transactions where legal title passes to thecustomer upon shipment, we recognize revenue upon shipment for those products where the customer’sdefined specifications have been met with at least two similarly configured systems and processes for a comparably situated customer. However, a portion of the revenue associated with certain installation-related tasks, equal to the greater of the relative fair value of those tasks or the portion of the contractprice contingent upon their completion, generally 10%-20% of the system’s selling price (the“holdback”), and directly related costs, if any, are deferred and recognized into income when the tasksare completed. Since we defer only those costs directly related to installation or other unit of accountingnot yet delivered and the contingent portion of the contract price is often considerably greater than thefair market value of those items, our policy at times will result in deferral of profit that isdisproportionately greater than the deferred revenue. When this is the case, the gross margin recognizedin one period will be lower and the gross margin reported in a subsequent period will improve.
- For products where the customer’s defined specifications have not been met with at least two similarlyconfigured systems and processes, the revenue and directly related costs are deferred at the time ofshipment and recognized into income at the time of customer acceptance or when this criterion has beenmet. We have, on occasion, experienced longer than expected delays in receiving cash from certaincustomers pending final installation or system acceptance. If some of our customers refuse to pay thefinal payment, or otherwise delay final acceptance or installation, the deferred revenue would not berecognized, adversely affecting our future operating results.
- Equipment sold by the polishing supplies segment generally does not include process guarantees,acceptance criteria or holdbacks; therefore in most instances, the related revenue is recorded upontransfer of title which is generally at time of shipment. Our shipping terms for both segments areprimarily FOB our shipping point or equivalent terms.
- For all segments, sales of spare parts and consumables are recognized upon shipment, as there are nopost shipment obligations other than standard warranties.
25
- Service revenue is recognized upon performance of the services requested by the customer. Revenuerelated to service contracts is recognized ratably over the period of the contract or in accordance with theterms of the contract, which generally coincides with the performance of the services requested by thecustomer.
Income Taxes. The calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws in the various jurisdictions in which the Company operates. This requires us to estimate our (i) current tax exposure; (ii) temporary differences that result from differing treatment of certain items for tax and accounting purposes and (iii) unrecognized tax benefits.The estimated annual effective tax rate used in calculating the income tax provision for interim periods is highly dependent upon estimates of pre-tax income for the fiscal year. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner inconsistent with our expectations could have a material impact on our operations and financial condition.
We currently have significant deferred tax assets resulting from expenses not currently deductible for tax purposes, revenue recognized for tax purposes but deferred for financial statement purposes, and carryforwards of net operating losses in certain state and foreign jurisdictions and foreign tax credits available to reduce taxable income and tax payments in future periods. During fiscal 2004, we recorded a valuation allowance for the total of our deferred tax assets. SFAS No. 109 requires a valuation allowance be established when it is “more likely than not” that all or a portion of deferred tax assets will not be realized. During the period from 2005 through 2008, we achieved increasing profitability and utilized all of our federal net operating loss carry forwards. Each quarter, we analyze each deferred tax asset to determine the amount that is more likely than not to be realized, based upon the weight of available evidence, and adjust the valuation allowance to the amount of deferred taxes that do not meet the criteria for recognition under SFAS No. 109. Currently, we only maintain a valuation allowance with respect to certain state deferred tax assets and foreign net operating losses that may not be recovered.
In fiscal 2008, we adopted the provisions of FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109,” (FIN 48) as of the beginning of fiscal 2008. FIN 48 requires application of a more likely than not threshold to the recognition and derecognition of uncertain tax positions. FIN 48 requires us to recognize the amount of tax benefit that has a greater than 50 percent likelihood of being ultimately realized upon settlement. It further requires that a change in judgment related to the expected ultimate resolution of uncertain tax positions be recognized in earnings in the quarter of such change. Prior to adoption, our policy was to establish reserves that reflected the probable outcome of known tax contingencies.
Inventory Valuation.We value our inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Costs for approximately 80% of inventory is determined on an average cost basis with the remainder determined on a first-in, first-out (FIFO) basis. The write-down is primarily based on historical inventory usage adjusted for expected changes in product demand and production requirements. However, our industry is characterized by customers in highly cyclical industries, rapid technological changes, frequent new product developments and rapid product obsolescence. Changes in demand for our products and product mix could result in further write-downs.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts.We maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. This allowance is based on historical experience, credit evaluations, specific customer collection history and any customer-specific issues we have identified. Since a significant portion of our revenue is derived from the sale of high-value systems, our accounts receivable are often concentrated in a relatively few number of customers. A significant change in the liquidity or financial position of any one of these customers or its payment trends, could have a material adverse impact on the collectability of our accounts receivable and our future operating results.
Warranty.We provide a limited warranty, generally for 12 to 24 months, to our customers. A provision for the estimated cost of providing warranty coverage is recorded upon shipment of all systems. On occasion, we have been required and may be required in the future to provide additional warranty coverage to ensure that the systems are ultimately accepted or to maintain customer goodwill. While our warranty costs have historically been within our expectations and we believe that the amounts accrued for warranty expenditures are sufficient for all systems sold through June 30, 2009, we cannot guarantee that we will continue to experience a similar level of predictability with regard to warranty costs. In addition, technological changes or previously unknown defects in raw materials or components may result in more extensive and frequent warranty service than anticipated, which could result in an increase in our warranty expense.
26
Impairment of Long-lived Assets. We periodically evaluate whether events and circumstances have occurred that indicate the estimated useful lives of long-lived assets or intangible assets may warrant revision or that the remaining balance may not be recoverable. Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangibles are also tested for impairment at least annually. When factors indicate that an asset should be evaluated for possible impairment, we use an estimate of the related undiscounted net cash flows generated by the asset over the remaining estimated life of the asset in measuring whether the asset is recoverable. We make judgments and estimates used in establishing the carrying value of long-lived or intangible assets. Those judgments and estimates could be modified if adverse changes occurred in the future resulting in an inability to recover the carrying value of these assets. Below is a more detailed explanation of the procedures we perform.
We perform a two-step impairment test discussed in SFAS 142. In the first step, we estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and compare it to the carrying value of the reporting unit. Most of our reporting units are operating segments that are one level below the reportable segment into which they are aggregated. The one exception is P.R. Hoffman Machine Products, Inc. which is a reportable segment. When the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit, the second step is performed to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. In the second step, the amount of the impairment loss is the excess of the carrying amount of the goodwill and other intangibles not subject to amortization over their implied fair value.
The methods used to estimate fair value of the reporting unit for the purpose of determining the implied fair value of goodwill include the market approach and discounted cash flows, as follows:
| i. | | One valuation methodology used is to determine the multiples of market value of invested capital (“MVIC”) of similar public companies to their revenue for the last twelve months (“LTM”) and next twelve months (“NTM”), and apply those multiples to the revenue for the comparable periods of the reporting unit being tested for impairment. One benefit of this approach is it is the closest to quoted market prices that are readily available. However, we generally give less weight to this method, because the market value of the minority interest of public companies may not be that relevant to the fair value of our wholly-owned reporting units, which are not public companies. Also, MVIC to revenue for the LTM uses a historical value in the denominator, while the market values tend to be forward looking; and MVIC of revenue for the NTM involves the use of projections for both the comparable companies and the reporting unit. |
| |
| ii. | | Another market approach that we sometimes use is based upon prices paid in merger and acquisition transactions for other companies in the same industry, again applying the MVIC to revenue of those companies to the historical and projected revenue of the reporting unit. When we use both market prices determined as described in (i), above, and prices paid in merger and acquisition transactions, we weight them to determine an indicated value under the market approach. |
| |
| iii. | | As stated, we also use discounted cash flows as an indication of what a third-party would pay for the reporting unit in an arms-length transaction. This method requires projections of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) and applying an appropriate discount rate based on the weighted average cost of capital for the reporting unit. |
We generally give the greatest weight, often 75% or more, to the discounted cash flow method, due to difficulty in identifying a sufficient number of companies that are truly comparable to a given reporting unit. This is because two of our three reporting units are relatively small businesses serving niche markets.
The material estimates and assumptions used in the discounted cash flows method of determining fair value include (i) the appropriate discount rate, given the risk-free rate of return and various risk premiums, (ii) projected revenues, (iii) projected material cost as a percentage of revenue, and (iv) the rate of increase in payroll and other expense. Quantitatively, the discount rate is the assumption that has the most pervasive effect on the discounted cash flows. We determine the discount rate used based on input from a valuation firm, which applies various approaches taking into account the particular circumstances of the reporting unit in arriving at a recommendation. For annual valuations, we test the sensitivity of the assumptions used in our discounted cash flow projection with the aid of a valuation firm, which utilizes a Monte Carlo simulation model, wherein various probabilities are assigned to the key assumptions.
27
In the current year, we performed a mid-year test of the impairment of the goodwill and other intangibles due to changing circumstances regarding the Bruce Technologies reporting unit. This test required us to use judgments and estimates that could be materially different than actual results. Bruce Technologies continued to incur losses after a restructuring and cost reductions put into place during the prior fiscal year and expectations that semiconductor customers served by this reporting unit would not in the future achieve the kinds of growth rates they had in the past due to increased maturity of that industry. We used the same discount rate as used in the prior annual impairment test of this reporting unit, but the other assumptions became more conservative due to the changing circumstances. It was primarily the lowered projections of future revenue that resulted in a lower estimate of fair value and the impairment loss. The payroll and certain expense assumptions, however, were lowered to take into account a second restructuring of the reporting unit, which involved a significant reduction in the number of employees. The material cost assumption was also lowered to take into account a change in product mix.
Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
For discussion of the impact of recently issued accounting pronouncements, see “Item 1: Financial Information” under “Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements”.
28
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. Our operations in the United States are conducted in U.S. dollars. Our operations in Europe, a component of the Solar and Semiconductor Equipment Segment, conduct business primarily in the Euro, but also sell products in Asia in the U.S. dollar. The functional currency of our European operations is the Euro. Nearly all of the transactions, assets and liabilities of all other operating units are denominated in the U.S. dollar, their functional currency. The following disclosures about market risk should be read in conjunction with the more in depth discussion in Item 7A, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008.
As of June 30, 2009, we did not hold any stand-alone or separate derivative instruments. We incurred net foreign currency transaction gains or losses of less than $0.1 million during the three and nine month periods ended June 30, 2009 and 2008. As of June 30, 2009, our foreign subsidiaries had $0.7 million of net assets (cash, receivables and amounts due to our foreign subsidiaries by our U.S. companies offset by minor amounts of accounts payable) denominated in currencies other than the functional currency. A 10% change in the value of the functional currency relative to the other currencies would result in gains or losses of approximately $0.1 million.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2009 we incurred foreign currency translation losses, a component of comprehensive income (loss) which was a direct adjustment to stockholders’ equity, of $0.7 million due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to the Euro. Our net investment in and long-term advances to our foreign operations totaled $43.0 million as of June 30, 2009. A 10% change in the value of the Euro relative to the U.S. dollar would cause a foreign currency translation adjustment of approximately $4.3 million.
During the nine months ended June 30, 2009, our European operations transacted U.S. dollar denominated sales and purchases of $4.0 million and $2.3 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2009, we had purchase commitments of $2.4 million denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of our transacting operation. A 10% change in the relevant exchange rates between the time the order was placed and the time of receipt would cause costs of such orders to be approximately $0.2 million more or less than expected on the date the order was placed. As of June 30, 2009 we had no sales commitments denominated in a currency other than the functional currency of our transacting operation.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, including the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and the Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), has carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of June 30, 2009, pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15(d)-15(e). Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO have concluded that as of such date, our disclosure controls and procedures in place are effective.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There has been no change in Amtech’s internal control over financial reporting during the three months ended June 30, 2009 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, its internal control over financial reporting.
29
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The most significant risk factors applicable to Amtech are described in Part I, Item 1A (Risk Factors) of Amtech’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2008 (our “2008 Form 10-K”). Except as set forth below, there have been no material changes to the risk factors previously disclosed on our 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The solar and semiconductor equipment industry is competitive and we are relatively small in size and have fewer resources in comparison with our competitors.
Our industry includes large manufacturers with substantial resources to support customers worldwide. Our future performance depends, in part, upon our ability to continue to compete successfully worldwide. Some of our competitors are diversified companies having substantially greater financial resources and more extensive research, engineering, manufacturing, marketing and customer service and support capabilities than we can provide. We face competition from companies whose strategy is to provide a broad array of products, some of which compete with the products and services that we offer. These competitors may bundle their products in a manner that may discourage customers from purchasing our products. In addition, we face competition from smaller emerging solar and semiconductor equipment companies whose strategy is to provide a portion of the products and services that we offer at often a lower price than ours or use innovative technology to sell products into specialized markets. Loss of competitive position could impair our prices, customer orders, revenue, gross margin and market share, any of which would negatively affect our financial position and results of operations. Our failure to compete successfully with these other companies would seriously harm our business. There is a risk that competitors will develop and market more advanced products than those that we are then able to offer, or that competitors with greater financial resources may decrease prices thereby putting us under financial pressure. The occurrence of any of these events could have a negative impact on our revenue.
We are dependent on key personnel and relationships for our business and product development and sales, and any loss of our key personnel to competitors or other industries or the failure to perform by key technology vendors could dramatically, negatively impact our future operations.
Historically, our product development has been accomplished through cooperative efforts with key customers and vendors. Our relationship with a key technology vendor and some customers is substantially dependent on personal relations established by our President and Chief Executive Officer. Our relationship with a major research institute, discussed below, and a European customer that has been instrumental in the development of our small batch vertical furnace are substantially dependent upon our European General Manager. We are dependent upon our Technical Director of R2D for the development of our automation technology. Furthermore, our multi-product solar growth strategy is heavily dependent on PST Co., Ltd. and The Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands for delivering key new products and confirming the technological advantage of those products. Should any of these relationships terminate or our key technology vendors fail to adequately perform, it could materially and adversely affect our multi-product solar growth strategy.
We may not be able to keep pace with the rapid change in the technology we use in our products.
Success in the solar and semiconductor equipment industry depends, in part, on continual improvement of existing technologies and rapid innovation of new solutions that have a technological, price or other advantages over those of our competitors. For example, the solar industry continues to increase cell efficiency and strives to reach grid parity. As another example, the semiconductor industry continues to shrink the size of semiconductor devices. These and other evolving customer needs require us to respond with continued development programs. Technical innovations are inherently complex and require long development cycles and appropriate professional staffing. Our future business success depends on our ability to develop and introduce new products, or new uses for existing products that more effectively address changing customer needs than the products of our competitors, win market acceptance of these new products or uses and manufacture any new products in a timely and cost-effective manner. If we do not develop and introduce new products, technologies or uses for existing products in a timely manner relative to our competitors and continually find ways of reducing the cost to produce them in response to changing market conditions or customer requirements, our business could be seriously harmed.
30
Item 6. | | Exhibits | | |
31.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended | | * |
| | | |
31.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended | | * |
| | | |
32.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | | * |
____________________
* Filed herewith.
31
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.
AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC.
| By | /s/ Robert T. Hass | | Dated: | August 6, 2009 | |
| | |
| | Robert T. Hass | | |
| | Chief Accounting Officer | | |
| | (Principal Accounting Officer) | | |
32
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit | | | | Page or |
Number | | Description | | Method of Filing |
31.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended | | * |
|
31.2 | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as Amended | | * |
|
32.1 | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | | * |
____________________
* Filed herewith.
33