KLA CORP
10-Qs and 10-Ks
PROXIES
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
|
FORM 10-K
|
(Mark One)
|
x
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011
|
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 No. 000-09992
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
|
Delaware
|
|
04-2564110
|
|
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
|
One Technology Drive, Milpitas, California
|
|
95035
|
|
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (408) 875-3000
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share
|
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
|
|
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
|
||
|
None
|
||
|
(Title of Class)
|
||
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
x
No
o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes
o
No
x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes
x
No
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, 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). Yes
x
No
o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.
o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
Large accelerated filer
x
|
|
Accelerated filer
o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer
o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company
o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes
o
No
x
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant based upon the closing price of the registrant’s stock, as of
December 31, 2010
, was approximately
$6.4 billion
.
The registrant had
167,000,217
shares of common stock outstanding as of
July 21, 2011
.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Proxy Statement for the
2011
Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on
November 3, 2011
(“Proxy Statement”), and to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the registrant’s fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.
INDEX
|
|
|||
|
PART I
|
|||
|
Item 1.
|
|
||
|
Item 1A.
|
|
||
|
Item 1B.
|
|
||
|
Item 2.
|
|
||
|
Item 3.
|
|
||
|
Item 4.
|
|
||
|
PART II
|
|||
|
Item 5.
|
|
||
|
Item 6.
|
|
||
|
Item 7.
|
|
||
|
Item 7A.
|
|
||
|
Item 8.
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Item 9.
|
|
||
|
Item 9A.
|
|
||
|
Item 9B.
|
|
||
|
PART III
|
|||
|
Item 10.
|
|
||
|
Item 11.
|
|
||
|
Item 12.
|
|
||
|
Item 13.
|
|
||
|
Item 14.
|
|
||
|
PART IV
|
|||
|
Item 15.
|
|
||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
i
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements other than statements of historical fact may be forward-looking statements. You can identify these and other forward-looking statements by the use of words such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “relies,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “intends,” “potential,” “continue,” “thinks,” “seeks,” or the negative of such terms, or other comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements also include the assumptions underlying or relating to any of the foregoing statements. Such forward-looking statements include, among others, forecasts of the future results of our operations; the percentage of spending that our customers allocate to process control; orders for our products and capital equipment generally; sales of semiconductors; the allocation of capital spending by our customers; growth of revenue in the semiconductor industry, the semiconductor capital equipment industry and our business; technological trends in the semiconductor industry; future developments or trends in the global capital and financial markets; our future product offerings and product features; the success and market acceptance of new products; timing of shipment of backlog; the future of our product shipments and our product and service revenues; our future gross margins; our future research and development expenses and selling, general and administrative expenses; our ability to successfully maintain cost discipline; international sales and operations; our ability to maintain or improve our existing competitive position; success of our product offerings; creation and funding of programs for research and development; attraction and retention of employees; results of our investment in leading edge technologies; the effects of hedging transactions; the effect of the sale of trade receivables and promissory notes from customers; our future income tax rate; future payments of dividends to our stockholders; the completion of any acquisitions of third parties, or the technology or assets thereof; benefits received from any acquisitions and development of acquired technologies; sufficiency of our existing cash balance, investments and cash generated from operations to meet our operating and working capital requirements; and the adoption of new accounting pronouncements.
Our actual results may differ significantly from those projected in the forward-looking statements in this report. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in Item 1A, “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as in Item 1, “Business” and Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this report. You should carefully review these risks and also review the risks described in other documents we file from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q that we will file in the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, and we expressly assume no obligation and do not intend to update the forward-looking statements in this report after the date hereof.
ii
PART I
|
ITEM 1.
|
BUSINESS
|
The Company
KLA-Tencor Corporation
TM
(“KLA-Tencor” or the “Company” and also referred to as “we” or “our”) is a leading supplier of process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries. Our products are also used in a number of other industries, including the light emitting diode (“LED”), data storage and photovoltaic industries, as well as general materials research.
Within our primary area of focus, our comprehensive portfolio of products, services, software and expertise helps integrated circuit (“IC” or “chip”) manufacturers manage yield throughout the entire semiconductor fabrication process—from research and development to final volume production. These products and solutions are designed to help customers accelerate their development and production ramp cycles, to achieve higher and more stable semiconductor die yields, and to improve overall profitability.
KLA-Tencor’s products and services are used by the vast majority of wafer, IC, reticle and disk manufacturers in the world. These customers turn to us for inline wafer and IC defect monitoring, review and classification; reticle defect inspection and metrology; packaging and interconnect inspection; critical dimension (“CD”) metrology; pattern overlay metrology; film thickness, surface topography and composition measurements; measurement of in-chamber process conditions, wafer shape and stress metrology; computational lithography tools; and overall yield and fab-wide data management and analysis systems. Our advanced products, coupled with our unique yield management services, allow us to deliver the solutions our customers need to accelerate their yield learning rates and significantly reduce their risks and costs.
Certain industry and technical terms used in this section are defined in the subsection entitled “Glossary” found at the end of this Item 1.
KLA-Tencor Corporation was formed in April 1997 through the merger of KLA Instruments Corporation
TM
and Tencor Instruments
TM
, two long-time leaders in the semiconductor equipment industry that had originally begun operations in 1975 and 1976, respectively.
Additional information about KLA-Tencor is available on our website at www.kla-tencor.com. We make available free of charge on our website our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file them with or furnish them to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Information contained on our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or our other filings with the SEC. Additionally, these filings may be obtained through the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov), which contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically. Documents that are not available through the SEC’s website may also be obtained by mailing a request to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of FOIA/PA Operations, 100 F Street N.E., Washington, DC 20549-2736, by submitting an online request form at the SEC’s website or by sending a fax to the SEC at 1-202-772-9337.
Industry
General Background
The semiconductor industry is KLA-Tencor’s core focus. The semiconductor fabrication process begins with a bare silicon wafer—a round disk that is six, eight or twelve inches in diameter, about as thick as a credit card and gray in color. The process of manufacturing wafers is in itself highly sophisticated, involving the creation of large ingots of silicon by pulling them out of a vat of molten silicon. The ingots are then sliced into wafers. Prime silicon wafers are then polished to a mirror finish. Other, more specialized wafers, such as epitaxial silicon (“epi”) and silicon-on-insulator (“SOI”), are also becoming common in the semiconductor industry.
The manufacturing cycle of an IC is grouped into three phases: design, fabrication and testing. IC design involves the architectural layout of the circuit, as well as design verification and reticle generation. The fabrication of a chip is accomplished by depositing a series of film layers that act as conductors, semiconductors or insulators on bare wafers. The deposition of these film layers is interspersed with numerous other process steps that create circuit patterns, remove portions of the film layers, and perform other functions such as heat treatment, measurement and inspection. Most advanced chip designs require hundreds of individual steps, many of which are performed multiple times. Most chips consist of two main structures: the lower structure,
1
typically consisting of transistors or capacitors which perform the “smart” functions of the chip; and the upper “interconnect” structure, typically consisting of circuitry which connects the components in the lower structure. When all of the layers on the wafer have been fabricated, each chip on the wafer is tested for functionality. The wafer is then cut into individual devices, and those chips that passed functional testing are packaged. Final testing is performed on all packaged chips.
Current Trends
Companies that anticipate future market demands by developing and refining new technologies and manufacturing processes are better positioned to lead in the semiconductor market. Accelerating the yield ramp and maximizing production yields of high-performance devices are key goals of modern semiconductor manufacturing. Ramping to high-volume production ahead of competitors can dramatically increase the revenue an IC manufacturer realizes for a given product. During past industry cycles, semiconductor manufacturers generally contended with a few key new technologies or market trends, such as a specific design rule shrink. In today’s market, driven by consumer demand for low-cost electronic goods from smart phones and MP3 players to laptops, tablets and portable devices, the leading semiconductor manufacturers are investing in simultaneous production integration of multiple new process technologies, some requiring new substrate and film materials, new geometries and advanced lithography techniques.
While many of these technologies have been adopted at the development and pilot production stages of chip manufacturing, significant challenges and risks associated with each technology have affected their adoption into full-volume production. For example, as design rules decrease, yields become more sensitive to the size and density of defects, while device performance characteristics (namely speed, capacity or power management) become more sensitive to such parameters as linewidth and film thickness variation. New process materials, such as high-k dielectrics, SOI wafers and immersion lithography-capable photoresists, require extensive characterization before they can be used in the manufacturing process. Moving several of these advanced technologies into production at once only adds to the risks that chipmakers face.
The continuing evolution of semiconductor devices to smaller geometries and more complex multi-level circuitry has significantly increased the performance and cost requirements of the capital equipment used to manufacture these devices. Construction of an advanced wafer fabrication facility today can cost over $5 billion, substantially more than previous generation facilities. In addition, chipmakers are demanding increased productivity and higher returns from their manufacturing equipment and are also seeking ways to extend the performance of their existing equipment.
By developing new process control and yield management tools that help chipmakers accelerate the adoption of these new technologies into volume production, we enable our customers to better leverage these increasingly expensive facilities and significantly improve their return on investment (“ROI”). Once customers’ production lines are operating at high volume, our tools help ensure that yields are stable and process excursions are identified for quick resolution. In addition, the move to each new generation’s smaller design rules, coupled with new materials and device innovation, has increased in-process variability, which requires an increase in inspection and metrology sampling.
KLA-Tencor systems not only analyze defectivity and metrology issues at critical points in the wafer, reticle and IC manufacturing processes, but also provide information to our customers so that they can identify and address the underlying process problems. The ability to locate the source of defects and resolve the underlying process issues enables our customers to improve control over their manufacturing processes. This helps them increase their yield of high-performance parts and deliver their products to market ahead of their competitors—thus maximizing their profit. With our broad portfolio of application-focused technologies and our dedicated yield technology expertise, we are in position to be a key supplier of comprehensive yield management solutions for customers’ next-generation products, helping our customers respond to the challenges posed by shrinking device sizes, the transition to new production materials, new device and circuit architecture, more demanding lithography processes, the transition from 300 millimeter to 450 millimeter wafers, and new back-end packaging techniques.
Products
KLA-Tencor is engaged primarily in the design, manufacture and marketing of process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries.
KLA-Tencor’s offerings can be broadly categorized into the following groups: Chip Manufacturing, Wafer Manufacturing, Reticle Manufacturing, Complementary Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor ("CMOS") Image Sensors Manufacturing, Solar Manufacturing, LED Manufacturing, Data Storage Media/Head Manufacturing, Microelectromechanical Systems ("MEMS") Manufacturing, and General Purpose/Lab Applications. We also provide refurbished KLA-Tencor tools as part of our K-T Certified
TM
program for customers manufacturing larger design-rule devices, as well as comprehensive service and support for our products. The more significant of these products are included in the product table at the end of this "Products" section. Every year, we introduce a number of new products; some of the new products we introduced in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
are described below.
2
Chip Manufacturing
KLA-Tencor’s comprehensive portfolio of defect inspection, review, metrology, in-situ process monitoring and lithography modeling tools help chip manufacturers manage yield throughout the entire fabrication process—from research and development to final volume production. These products and solutions are designed to help fabs accelerate their development and production ramp cycles, to achieve higher and more stable semiconductor die yields, and to improve overall profitability.
Front-End Defect Inspection
KLA-Tencor’s front-end defect inspection tools cover a broad range of yield applications within the IC manufacturing environment, including: research and development; incoming wafer qualification; reticle qualification; and tool, process and line monitoring. Patterned and unpatterned wafer inspectors find particles, pattern defects and electrical issues on the front surface, back surface and edge of the wafer, allowing engineers to detect and monitor critical yield excursions. Fabs rely on our high sensitivity reticle inspection systems to identify defects in reticles at an early stage, to prevent reticle defects from printing on production wafers. The defect data generated by our inspectors is compiled and reduced to relevant root-cause and yield-analysis information with our suite of data management tools. By implementing our front-end defect inspection and analysis systems, chipmakers are able to take quick corrective action, resulting in faster yield improvement and better time to market.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, we launched several front-end defect inspection products that help accelerate yield for next-generation design node devices. Our TeraFab
TM
HT reticle defect inspection system features improvements to the previous generation TeraFab's laser, sensor, optical path and signal processing algorithms for enhanced detection sensitivity and throughput. The VisEdge
®
CV300R-EP is a wafer edge metrology and inspection system that combines wafer edge profile, film edge metrology and edge defect inspection into one system. The XP Offline upgrade option for the Puma
TM
9550 narrowband wafer inspection platform reduces the time required for inspection recipe setup on manufacturing tools by allowing users to create recipes offline, resulting in increased tool capacity.
The products that we launched during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 further strengthened our broad range of offerings that support the front-end defect inspection market. In the field of patterned wafer inspection, for example, we offer our 2810 Series, 2820 Series and 2830 Series systems (for broadband optical defect inspection); our Puma 9100 Series and 9500 Series systems (for narrowband optical defect inspection); and our eS35 system (for e-beam defect inspection). In the field of unpatterned wafer and surface inspection, our primary offering is the Surfscan
®
SP Series (a series of wafer defect inspection systems for process tool qualification and monitoring using blanket films and bare wafers), to which the SURFmonitor
TM
module may be added to enable surface quality measurements and capture of low-contrast defects. For reticle inspection, we offer our TeraFab products, which are photomask inspection systems that allow IC fabs to qualify incoming reticles and inspect production reticles for contaminants. In addition, we offer a number of other products for the front-end defect inspection market, as reflected in the product table at the conclusion of this “Products” section.
Back-End Defect Inspection
KLA-Tencor offers standalone inspection systems for various applications in the field of semiconductor packaging (i.e., at the back-end of the semiconductor manufacturing process). Our Component Inspector (“CI”) products inspect various semiconductor components that are handled in a tray, such as microprocessors or memory chips. Component inspection capability includes 3D coplanarity inspection, measurement of the evenness of the contacts and 2D surface inspection. In March 2011, we introduced the ICOS
®
CI-T620, designed to increase flexibility and system throughput for package inspection.
Defect Review
KLA-Tencor’s defect review systems capture high resolution images of the defects detected by inspection tools. These images enable defect classification, helping chipmakers to identify and resolve yield issues. Our complete line of defect review and classification tools spans optical and electron-beam technologies, from bench-top research systems to production-worthy tools having full factory automation. KLA-Tencor’s suite of defect inspectors, defect review and classification tools and data management systems form a broad solution for finding, identifying and tracking yield-critical defects and process issues. In July 2010, we introduced the eDR
TM
-5210S, an e-beam review and classification system with reticle defect review and critical point inspection modes to assist chipmakers in identifying systematic defect sources and resolving yield issues. Additionally, the new eDR-5210S includes improvements that enhance its automated bare wafer defect review capability.
3
Metrology
KLA-Tencor’s array of metrology solutions addresses integrated circuit, substrate, photovoltaic solar cell and medical device manufacturing, as well as scientific research and other applications. Precise metrology and control of pattern dimensions, film thicknesses, layer-to-layer alignment, pattern placement, surface topography and electro-optical properties are growing in importance in many industries as critical dimensions narrow, film thicknesses shrink to countable numbers of atomic layers and devices become more complex. In August 2010, we launched the Aleris
TM
8330 film metrology system, a targeted solution for production monitoring of the thickness, refractive index and stress of non-critical films at the 32nm node and beyond. In March 2011, we announced the SpectraShape
TM
8660 and 8810 optical CD and shape metrology systems. The new SpectraShape systems fully characterize and monitor the critical dimensions and three-dimensional shapes of geometrically complex features incorporated by some IC manufacturers in their latest generation devices.
In-Situ Process Monitoring
KLA-Tencor’s SensArray
®
SensorWafers series provides a unique way, not available from conventional equipment monitors, to capture the effect of the process environment on production wafers. Measurements, such as temperature and radio frequency voltage, are used by both chipmakers and process equipment manufacturers to visualize, diagnose and control their processes and process tools. SensArray products are used in many semiconductor and flat panel display fabrication processes, including lithography, etch and deposition.
Lithography Modeling
KLA-Tencor’s PROLITH
TM
product line provides researchers at advanced IC manufacturers, lithography hardware suppliers, track companies and material providers with virtual lithography software to explore critical-feature designs, manufacturability and process-limited yield of proposed lithographic technologies without the time and expense of printing hundreds of test wafers using experimental materials and prototype process equipment.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, we introduced PROLITH X3.2, which enables large-scale lithography simulations to troubleshoot challenging issues in extreme ultra-violet (“EUV”) and advanced optical lithography technologies.
Wafer Manufacturing
KLA-Tencor’s wafer manufacturing tools include inspection, metrology and data management systems. Specialized inspection tools assess surface quality and detect, count and bin defects during the wafer manufacturing process and as a critical part of outgoing inspection. Wafer geometry tools ensure the wafer is extremely flat and uniform in thickness, with precisely controlled surface topography. Specifications for wafer defectivity, geometry and surface quality are tightening as the dimensions of transistors become so small that the properties of the substrate can substantially affect transistor performance.
Key products in the wafer manufacturing field include our Surfscan SP series systems, which offer defect and surface quality inspection for polished wafers, epi wafers and engineered substrates, as well as SURFmonitor, an optional module for Surfscan SP2 and Surfscan SP2
XP
systems that performs both surface and defect inspection (by monitoring process drift and capturing low-contrast defects) as well as wafer geometry and nanotopography metrology (by indicating sub-Angstrom surface topography variation on bare substrates). Other products that we offer for the wafer manufacturing market are highlighted in the product table at the conclusion of this “Products” section.
Reticle Manufacturing
Error-free reticles, or masks, are the first step in achieving high semiconductor device yields, since reticle defects can be replicated on production wafers. KLA-Tencor offers high sensitivity reticle inspection and metrology systems for mask shops, designed to help them manufacture reticles that are free of any relevant defects and meet mask metrology requirements. The reticle inspection systems use optical imaging and multiple inspection modes to find numerous types of reticle defects prior to printing on the wafer. The metrology systems enable quality reticle manufacturing by providing acute precision for reticle pattern placement and accurate measurement of reticles’ critical dimensions.
Our reticle inspection portfolio includes the Teron 600 Series for development and manufacturing of advanced optical and EUV masks, the TeraScan
TM
XR system for mask shop production of reticles for the 32nm node and above and our TeraFab products for reticle defect monitoring capability for IC fabs.
4
CMOS Image Sensors Manufacturing
Image sensors are devices that convert light into electrical signal, for use primarily in cameras. As yield-limiting defects can occur at any step in the assembly process, inspecting the filter or micro-lens layers can help reduce materials waste and cycle time.
CMOS Image Sensor manufacturing is supported by our 8900 defect inspection system. The 8900 is designed to enable capture of a wide variety of defect types, with adjustable sensitivity and throughput settings for cost-effective defect management from initial product development through volume production of color filter arrays.
Solar Manufacturing
Photovoltaic or “solar” cells are used to produce electrical power from light. The continuing growth of the solar industry is closely related to the production cost of solar cells, as economic viability increases with lowering prices. To address our customers’ needs in this important industry, KLA-Tencor offers solar wafer and cell inspection modules, yield management software, and surface profilers which are integrated in different stages of the solar wafer and cell production lines to increase yield and lower production costs.
KLA-Tencor’s ICOS
®
PVI inspection modules are designed for high speed, automated, optical in-line inspection of both the front and backside of monocrystalline and polycrystalline solar wafers and cells, as well as optical classification of solar cells at the final stage of the production flow. In June 2011, we introduced our FabVision
TM
solar data collection and defect analysis software, which is designed to help manufacturers maximize production yields from PVI-6 modules.
LED Manufacturing
LEDs are becoming more commonly used in solid-state lighting, television and notebook backlighting, and automotive applications. As LED device makers target aggressive cost and performance targets, they place significant emphasis on improved process control and yield during the manufacturing process.
In January 2011, we launched a portfolio of three systems to help LED manufacturers reduce production costs and increase product output: Candela
TM
8620, Klarity
®
LED and ICOS
®
WI-2220. The Candela 8620 substrate and epi wafer inspection system provides automated inspection and quality control of LED substrates, detecting defects that can impact device performance, yield and field reliability. Klarity LED is an automated defect data management and analysis system for LED yield enhancement. The ICOS WI-2220 is a patterned wafer inspection tool for whole and diced wafers that helps improve LED device reliability.
Data Storage Media/Head Manufacturing
Growth in data storage is being driven by a wave of innovative consumer electronics with small form factors and immense storage capacities, as well as an increasing need for high-volume storage options to back up new methods of remote computing and networking (such as cloud computing). Our process control and yield management solutions are designed to enable customers to rapidly understand and resolve complex manufacturing problems, which can help improve time to market and product yields. In the front-end and back-end of thin-film head wafer manufacturing, we offer the same process control equipment that we serve to the semiconductor industry. In addition, we offer an extensive range of test equipment and surface profilers with particular strength in photolithography. In substrate and media manufacturing, we offer metrology and defect inspection solutions with KLA-Tencor’s optical surface analyzers.
MEMS Manufacturing
The increasing demand for MEMS technology is coming from diverse industries such as automotive, space and consumer electronics. MEMS have the potential to revolutionize nearly every product category by bringing together silicon-based microelectronics with micromachining technology, making possible the realization of complete systems-on-a-chip. KLA-Tencor offers the tools and techniques, first developed for the integrated circuit industry, for this emerging market.
General Purpose/Lab Applications
A range of industries, including general scientific and materials research and optoelectronics, require measurements of surface topography to either control their processes or research new material characteristics. Typical measurement parameters that our tools address include flatness, roughness, curvature, peak-to-valley, asperity, waviness, texture, volume, sphericity, slope, density, stress, bearing ratio and distance (mainly in the micron to nanometer range).
5
K-T Certified
K-T Certified is our certified refurbished tools program that delivers fully refurbished and tested KLA-Tencor tools to our customers with guaranteed performance. In addition to high-quality pre-owned 300mm and <200mm tools for the integrated circuit, reticle, substrate, MEMS and data storage markets, K-T Certified also offers system software and hardware performance upgrades to extend the capabilities of existing equipment. When a customer needs to move to the next manufacturing node, K-T Certified can help maximize existing assets through its repurchase, trade-in and redeployment services.
K-T Services
™
Our K-T Services program enables our customers in all business sectors to maintain the high performance and productivity of our products through a flexible portfolio of services. Whether a manufacturing site is producing integrated circuits, wafers or reticles, K-T Services delivers yield management expertise spanning advanced technology nodes, including collaboration with customers to determine the best products and services to meet technology requirements and optimize cost of ownership. Our comprehensive services include: proactive management of tools to identify and improve performance; expertise in optics, image processing and motion control with worldwide service engineers, 24/7 technical support teams and knowledge management systems; and an extensive parts network to ensure worldwide availability of parts.
6
Product Table
The following table presents a representative list of the products that we offered during the course of the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
:
|
MARKETS
|
|
APPLICATIONS
|
|
PRODUCTS
|
|
Chip Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Front-End Defect Inspection
|
|
Patterned Wafer
|
|
2810 Series, 2820 Series,
2830 Series
Puma
TM
9100 and 9500 Series
eS35
|
|
|
Macro and Edge
|
|
VisEdge
®
product family
LDS Series
8900
|
|
|
|
Unpatterned Wafer/Surface
|
|
Surfscan
®
SP2 Series
SURFmonitor
TM
|
|
|
|
Reticle
|
|
TeraFab
TM
Series
|
|
|
|
Data Management
|
|
Klarity
®
product family
|
|
|
Back-End Defect Inspection
|
|
Component Inspection
|
|
ICOS
®
CI product family
|
|
Defect Review
|
|
e-beam
|
|
eDR
TM
-5210 Series
|
|
|
Optical
|
|
INM, INS & IRIS product families
|
|
|
Metrology
|
|
Overlay
|
|
Archer
®
Series
|
|
|
Optical CD
|
|
SpectraCD
TM
Series
SpectraShape
TM
product family
|
|
|
|
Film Thickness/Index
|
|
Aleris
TM
product family
SpectraFx
TM
Series
|
|
|
|
Wafer Geometry and Topography
|
|
WaferSight
TM
SURFmonitor
TM
|
|
|
|
Ion Implant and Anneal
|
|
Therma-Probe
®
|
|
|
|
Surface Metrology
|
|
HRP
®
-350
P-Series product family
|
|
|
|
Resistivity
|
|
RS product family
|
|
|
|
Data Management
|
|
K-T Analyzer
®
|
|
|
In-Situ Process Monitoring
|
|
Lithography
|
|
SensArray
®
product family
|
|
|
Plasma Etch
|
|
SensArray
®
product family
|
|
|
|
Implant and Wet
|
|
SensArray
®
PlasmaSuite
|
|
|
Lithography Modeling
|
|
|
|
PROLITH
TM
and related product families
|
7
|
MARKETS AND APPLICATIONS
|
|
PRODUCTS
|
|
Wafer Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Surface and Defect Inspection
|
|
Surfscan
®
SP2 Series
SURFmonitor
TM
VisEdge
®
product family
|
|
Wafer Geometry and Nanotopography Metrology
|
|
WaferSight
TM
SURFmonitor
TM
|
|
Data Management
|
|
FabVision
TM
|
|
Reticle Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Defect Inspection
|
|
TeraScan
TM
XR
Teron
TM
Series
|
|
Pattern Placement Metrology
|
|
LMS IPRO
|
|
CMOS Image Sensors Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Defect Inspection
|
|
8900
|
|
Solar Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Optical Inspection
|
ICOS
®
PVI-6
|
|
|
Surface Metrology
|
|
P-Series product family
|
|
Data Management
|
|
FabVision
TM
Solar
|
|
LED Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Wafer Inspection
|
|
ICOS
®
WI product family
|
|
Defect Inspection
|
|
Candela
®
product family
|
|
Surface Metrology
|
|
P-Series product family
|
|
Data Management
|
Klarity
®
LED
|
|
|
Data Storage Media/Head Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Wafer and Slider Test
|
|
Aleris
TM
product family
HRP
®
-250
PROLITH
TM
product family
RS product family
SpectraCD
TM
200
|
|
Media Test
|
|
Candela
®
product family
|
|
Defect Review
|
|
INM product family
|
|
MEMS Manufacturing
|
|
|
|
Surface Metrology: Stylus Profiling
|
|
P-Series product family
|
|
Sealing Inspection
|
|
IRIS
|
|
Defect Review
|
|
INM & IRIS product families
|
|
General Purpose/Lab Applications
|
|
|
|
Surface Metrology: Stylus Profiling
|
|
P-Series product family
Alpha-Step
®
D-Series product family
|
|
Surface Metrology: Optical Profiling
|
|
MicroXAM-100
|
|
Process Chamber Conditions
|
|
SensArray
®
product family
|
Customers
To support our growing global customer base, we maintain a significant presence throughout Asia, the United States and Europe, staffed with local sales and applications engineers, customer and field service engineers and yield management consultants. We count among our largest customers the leading semiconductor manufacturers in each of these regions.
8
For the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, the following customers each accounted for more than 10% of total revenues:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
||
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
||
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
—
|
—
|
||
Our business depends upon the capital expenditures of semiconductor manufacturers, which in turn is driven by the current and anticipated market demand for ICs and products utilizing ICs. We do not consider our business to be seasonal in nature, but it is cyclical with respect to the capital equipment procurement practices of semiconductor manufacturers, and it is impacted by the investment patterns of such manufacturers in different global markets. Downturns in the semiconductor industry or slowdowns in the worldwide economy could have a material adverse effect on our future business and financial results.
Sales, Service and Marketing
Our sales, service and marketing efforts are aimed at building long-term relationships with our customers. We focus on providing a single and comprehensive resource for the full breadth of process control and yield management products and services. Customers benefit from the simplified planning and coordination, as well as the increased equipment compatibility, that are realized as a result of dealing with a single supplier. Our revenues are derived primarily from product sales, mostly through our direct sales force.
We believe that the size and location of our field sales, service and applications engineering, and marketing organizations represent a competitive advantage in our served markets. We have direct sales forces in Asia, the United States and Europe. We maintain an export compliance program that is designed to meet the requirements of the United States Departments of Commerce and State.
As of
June 30, 2011
, we employed approximately 2,150 sales and related personnel, service engineers and applications engineers. In addition to sales and service offices in the United States, we conduct sales, marketing and services out of wholly-owned subsidiaries or branches in other countries, including Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and the United Kingdom. International revenues accounted for approximately
81%
,
81%
and
76%
of our total revenues in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively. Additional information regarding our revenues from foreign operations for our last three fiscal years can be found in Note 17, “Segment Reporting and Geographic Information” to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We believe that sales outside the United States will continue to be a significant percentage of our total revenues. Our future performance will depend, in part, on our ability to continue to compete successfully in Asia, one of the largest markets for our equipment. Our ability to compete in this area is dependent upon the continuation of favorable trading relationships between countries in the region and the United States, and our continuing ability to maintain satisfactory relationships with leading semiconductor companies in the region.
International sales and operations may be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, restrictions on export technology, political instability, trade restrictions, changes in tariffs and the difficulties associated with staffing and managing international operations. In addition, international sales may be adversely affected by the economic conditions in each country. The revenues from our international business may also be affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates. Although we attempt to manage some of the currency risk inherent in non-U.S. dollar product sales through hedging activities, there can be no assurance that such efforts will be adequate. These factors, as well as any of the other risk factors related to our international business and operations that are described in Item 1A, “Risk Factors,” could have a material adverse effect on our future business and financial results.
Backlog
Our shipment backlog for systems and associated warranty totaled $988 million and $992 million as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, respectively, and primarily consists of sales orders where written customer requests have been received and the delivery is anticipated within the next 12 months. Orders for service contracts and unreleased products are excluded from shipment backlog. All orders are subject to cancellation or delay by the customer, often with limited or no penalties. We make adjustments for shipment backlog obtained from acquired companies, sales order cancellations, customer delivery date changes
9
and currency adjustments. Shipment backlog is not subject to normal accounting controls for information that is either reported in or derived from our basic financial statements. In addition, the concept of shipment backlog is not defined in the accounting literature, making comparisons between periods and with other companies difficult and potentially misleading.
Our revenue backlog, which includes sales orders where physical deliveries have been completed, but for which revenue has not been recognized pursuant to our policy for revenue recognition, totaled $382 million and $343 million as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, respectively. Orders for service contracts are excluded from revenue backlog.
Because customers can potentially change delivery schedules or delay or cancel orders, and because some orders are received and shipped within the same quarter, our shipment backlog at any particular date is not necessarily indicative of business volumes or actual sales for any succeeding periods. The cyclicality of the semiconductor industry combined with the lead times from our suppliers sometimes result in timing disparities between, on the one hand, our ability to manufacture, deliver and install products and, on the other, the requirements of our customers. In our efforts to balance the requirements of our customers with the availability of resources, management of our operating model and other factors, we often must exercise discretion and judgment as to the timing and prioritization of manufacturing, deliveries, and installations of products, which may impact the timing of revenue recognition with respect to such products.
Research and Development
The market for yield management and process monitoring systems is characterized by rapid technological development and product innovation. These technical innovations are inherently complex and require long development cycles and appropriate professional staffing. We believe that continued and timely development of new products and enhancements to existing products are necessary to maintain our competitive position. Accordingly, we devote a significant portion of our human and financial resources to research and development programs and seek to maintain close relationships with customers to remain responsive to their needs. In addition, we may enter into certain strategic development and engineering programs whereby certain government agencies or other third parties fund a portion of our research and development costs. As of
June 30, 2011
, we employed approximately 1,220 research and development personnel.
Our key research and development activities during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
involved the development of process control and yield management equipment aimed at addressing the challenges posed by shrinking device sizes, the transition to new production materials, new device and circuit architecture, more demanding lithography processes, the transition from 300 millimeter to 450 millimeter wafers, and new back-end packaging techniques. For information regarding our research and development expenses during the last three fiscal years, including costs offset by our strategic development and engineering programs, see Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The strength of our competitive positions in many of our existing markets is largely due to our leading technology, which is the result of our continuing significant investments in product research and development. Even during down cycles in the semiconductor industry, we have remained committed to significant engineering efforts toward both product improvement and new product development in order to enhance our competitive position. New product introductions, however, may contribute to fluctuations in operating results, since customers may defer ordering existing products, and, if new products have reliability or quality problems, those problems may result in reduced orders, higher manufacturing costs, delays in acceptance of and payment for new products, and additional service and warranty expenses. There can be no assurance that we will successfully develop and manufacture new products, or that new products introduced by us will be accepted in the marketplace. If we do not successfully introduce new products, our results of operations will be adversely affected.
Manufacturing, Raw Materials and Supplies
We perform system design, assembly and testing in-house and utilize an outsourcing strategy for the manufacture of components and major subassemblies. Our in-house manufacturing activities consist primarily of assembling and testing components and subassemblies that are acquired through third-party vendors and integrating those subassemblies into our finished products. Our principal manufacturing activities take place in the United States (Milpitas, California), Singapore, Israel, Belgium and Germany. As of
June 30, 2011
, we employed approximately 970 manufacturing personnel.
Some critical parts, components and subassemblies (collectively, “parts”) that we use are designed by us and manufactured by suppliers in accordance with our specifications, while other parts are standard commercial products. We use numerous vendors to supply parts and raw materials for the manufacture and support of our products. Although we make reasonable efforts to ensure that these parts and raw materials are available from multiple suppliers, this is not always possible, and certain parts and raw materials included in our systems may be obtained only from a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Through our business interruption planning, we endeavor to minimize the risk of production interruption by, among other things, monitoring the financial condition of suppliers of key parts and raw materials, identifying (but not necessarily
10
qualifying) possible alternative suppliers of such parts and materials and ensuring adequate inventories of key parts and raw materials are available to maintain manufacturing schedules.
Although we seek to reduce our dependence on sole and limited source suppliers, in some cases the partial or complete loss of certain of these sources could disrupt scheduled deliveries to customers, damage customer relationships and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Competition
The worldwide market for process control and yield management systems is highly competitive. In each of our product markets, we face competition from established and potential competitors, some of which may have greater financial, research, engineering, manufacturing and marketing resources than we have, such as Applied Materials, Inc. and Hitachi Electronics Engineering Co., Ltd. We may also face future competition from new market entrants from other overseas and domestic sources. We expect our competitors to continue to improve the design and performance of their current products and processes and to introduce new products and processes with improved price and performance characteristics. We believe that, to remain competitive, we will require significant financial resources to offer a broad range of products, to maintain customer service and support centers worldwide, and to invest in product and process research and development.
We believe that, while price and delivery are important competitive factors, the customers’ overriding requirement is for systems that easily and effectively incorporate automated and highly accurate inspection and metrology capabilities into their existing manufacturing processes to enhance productivity. Significant competitive factors in the market for process control and yield management systems include system performance, ease of use, reliability, installed base and technical service and support, as well as overall cost of ownership.
Management believes that we are well positioned in the market with respect to both our products and services. However, any loss of competitive position could negatively impact our prices, customer orders, revenues, gross margins and market share, any of which would negatively impact our operating results and financial condition.
Acquisitions and Alliances
We continuously evaluate strategic acquisitions and alliances to expand our technologies, product offerings and distribution capabilities. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including management issues and costs in connection with integration of the operations, technologies and products of the acquired companies, and the potential loss of key employees of the acquired companies. The inability to manage these risks effectively could negatively impact our operating results and financial condition.
Patents and Other Proprietary Rights
We protect our proprietary technology through reliance on a variety of intellectual property laws, including patent, copyright and trade secret. We have filed and obtained a number of patents in the United States and abroad and intend to continue pursuing the legal protection of our technology through intellectual property laws. In addition, from time to time we acquire license rights under United States and foreign patents and other proprietary rights of third parties, and we attempt to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information through confidentiality and other agreements with our customers, suppliers, employees and consultants and through other security measures.
Although we consider patents and other intellectual property significant to our business, due to the rapid pace of innovation within the process control and yield management systems industry, we believe that our protection through patent and other intellectual property rights is less important than factors such as our technological expertise, continuing development of new systems, market penetration, installed base and the ability to provide comprehensive support and service to customers worldwide.
No assurance can be given that patents will be issued on any of our applications, that license assignments will be made as anticipated, or that our patents, licenses or other proprietary rights will be sufficiently broad to protect our technology. No assurance can be given that any patents issued to or licensed by us will not be challenged, invalidated or circumvented or that the rights granted thereunder will provide us with a competitive advantage. In addition, there can be no assurance that we will be able to protect our technology or that competitors will not be able to independently develop similar or functionally competitive technology.
11
Environmental Matters
We are subject to a variety of federal, state and local governmental laws and regulations related to the protection of the environment, including without limitation the management of hazardous materials that we use in our business operations. Compliance with these environmental laws and regulations has not had, and is not expected to have, a material effect on our capital expenditures, financial condition, results of operations or competitive position.
However, any failure to comply with environmental laws and regulations may subject us to a range of consequences, including fines, suspension of certain of our business activities, limitations on our ability to sell our products, obligations to remediate environmental contamination, and criminal and civil liabilities or other sanctions. In addition, changes in environmental laws and regulations could require us to invest in potentially costly pollution control equipment, alter our manufacturing processes or use substitute materials. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could subject us to future liabilities.
Employees
As of
June 30, 2011
, we employed approximately 5,500 people. None of our employees are represented by a labor union; however, our employees in France (pursuant to French industrial relations law) and in the German operations of our MIE business unit are represented by employee work councils. We have not experienced work stoppages and believe that our employee relations are good.
Competition is intense in the recruiting of personnel in the semiconductor and semiconductor equipment industry. We believe that our future success will depend, in part, on our continued ability to hire and retain qualified management, marketing and technical employees.
Glossary
This section provides definitions for certain industry and technical terms commonly used in our business, which are used elsewhere in this Item 1:
|
back-end
|
|
Process steps that make up the second half of the semiconductor manufacturing process, from contact through completion of the wafer prior to electrical test.
|
|
broadband
|
|
An illumination source with a wide spectral bandwidth.
|
|
critical dimension (CD)
|
|
The dimension of a specified geometry (such as the width of a patterned line or the distance between two lines) that must be within design tolerances in order to maintain semiconductor device performance consistency.
|
|
design rules
|
|
Rules that set forth the allowable dimensions of particular features used in the design and layout of integrated circuits.
|
|
die
|
|
The term for a single semiconductor chip on a wafer.
|
|
electron-beam
|
|
An illumination source comprised of a stream of electrons emitted by a single source.
|
|
epitaxial silicon (epi)
|
A substrate technology based on growing a crystalline silicon layer on top of a silicon wafer. The added layer, where the structure and orientation are matched to those of the silicon wafer, includes dopants (impurities) to imbue the substrate with special electronic properties.
|
|
|
excursion
|
|
For a manufacturing step or process, a deviation from normal operating conditions that can lead to decreased performance or yield of the final product.
|
|
fab
|
The main manufacturing facility for processing semiconductor wafers.
|
|
12
|
front-end
|
|
The processes that make up the first half of the semiconductor manufacturing process, from wafer start through final contact window processing.
|
|
in-situ
|
|
Refers to processing steps or tests that are done without moving the wafer. Latin for “in original position.”
|
|
interconnect
|
|
A highly conductive material, usually aluminum or polysilicon, that carries electrical signals to different parts of a die.
|
|
lithography
|
|
A process in which a masked pattern is projected onto a photosensitive coating that covers a substrate.
|
|
mask shop
|
|
A manufacturer that produces the reticles used by semiconductor manufacturers.
|
|
metrology
|
|
The science of measurement to determine dimensions, quantity or capacity. In the semiconductor industry, typical measurements include critical dimension, overlay and film thickness.
|
|
microelectromechanical systems (MEMS)
|
|
Micron-sized mechanical devices powered by electricity, created using processes similar to those used to manufacture IC devices.
|
|
micron
|
|
A metric unit of linear measure that equals 1/1,000,000 meter (10
-6
m), or 10,000 angstroms (the diameter of a human hair is approximately 75 microns).
|
|
nanometer (nm)
|
|
One billionth (10
-9
) of a meter.
|
|
narrowband
|
|
An illumination source with a narrow spectral bandwidth, such as a laser.
|
|
patterned
|
|
For semiconductor manufacturing and industries using similar processing technologies, refers to substrates that have electronic circuits (transistors, interconnects, etc.) fabricated on the surface.
|
|
photoresist
|
|
A radiation-sensitive material that, when properly applied to a variety of substrates and then properly exposed and developed, masks portions of the substrate with a high degree of integrity.
|
|
process control
|
|
The ability to maintain specifications of product and equipment during manufacturing operations.
|
|
reticle
|
|
A very flat glass plate that contains the patterns to be reproduced on a wafer.
|
|
silicon-on-insulator (SOI)
|
A substrate technology comprised of a thin top silicon layer separated from the silicon substrate by a thin insulating layer of glass or silicon dioxide, used to improve performance and reduce the power consumption of IC circuits.
|
|
|
substrate
|
|
A wafer on which layers of various materials are added during the process of manufacturing semiconductor devices or circuits.
|
13
|
unpatterned
|
|
For semiconductor manufacturing and industries using similar processing technologies, refers to substrates that do not have electronic circuits (transistors, interconnects, etc.) fabricated on the surface. These can include bare silicon wafers, other bare substrates or substrates on which blanket films have been deposited.
|
|
yield management
|
|
The ability of a semiconductor manufacturer to oversee, manage and control its manufacturing processes so as to maximize the percentage of manufactured wafers or die that conform to pre-determined specifications.
|
__________________
The definitions above are from internal sources, as well as the SEMATECH Dictionary of Semiconductor Terms.
14
|
ITEM 1A.
|
RISK FACTORS
|
A description of factors that could materially affect our business, financial condition or operating results is provided below.
Risks Associated with Our Industry
The semiconductor equipment industry is highly cyclical. The purchasing decisions of our customers are highly dependent on the economies of both the local markets in which they are located and the semiconductor industry worldwide. If we fail to respond to industry cycles, our business could be seriously harmed.
The timing, length and severity of the up-and-down cycles in the semiconductor equipment industry are difficult to predict. The cyclical nature of the primary industry in which we operate is largely a function of our customers’ capital spending patterns and need for expanded manufacturing capacity, which in turn are affected by factors such as capacity utilization, consumer demand for products, inventory levels and our customers’ access to capital. This cyclicality affects our ability to accurately predict future revenue and, in some cases, future expense levels. During down cycles in our industry, the financial results of our customers may be negatively impacted, which could result not only in a decrease in, or cancellation or delay of, orders (which are generally subject to cancellation or delay by the customer with limited or no penalty) but also a weakening of their financial condition that could impair their ability to pay for our products or our ability to recognize revenue from certain customers. When cyclical fluctuations result in lower than expected revenue levels, operating results may be adversely affected and cost reduction measures may be necessary in order for us to remain competitive and financially sound. During periods of declining revenues, as was experienced during fiscal year 2009, we must be in a position to adjust our cost and expense structure to prevailing market conditions and to continue to motivate and retain our key employees. If we fail to respond, or if our attempts to respond fail to accomplish our intended results, then our business could be seriously harmed. Furthermore, any workforce reductions and cost reduction actions that we adopt in response to down cycles may result in additional restructuring charges, disruptions in our operations and loss of key personnel. In addition, during periods of rapid growth, we must be able to increase manufacturing capacity and personnel to meet customer demand. We can provide no assurance that these objectives can be met in a timely manner in response to industry cycles. Each of these factors could adversely impact our operating results and financial condition.
In addition, our management typically provides quarterly forecasts for certain financial metrics, which, when made, are based on business and operational forecasts that are believed to be reasonable at the time. However, largely due to the cyclicality of our business and the industries in which we operate, and the fact that business conditions in our industries can change very rapidly as part of these cycles, our actual results may vary (and have varied in the past) from forecasted results. These variations can occur for any number of reasons, including, but not limited to, unexpected changes in the volume or timing of customer orders, product shipments or product acceptances; an inability to adjust our operations rapidly enough to changing business conditions; or a different than anticipated effective tax rate. The impact on our business of delays or cancellations of customer orders may be exacerbated by the short lead times that our customers expect between order placement and product shipment. This is because order delays and cancellations may lead not only to lower revenues, but also, due to the advance work we must do in anticipation of receiving a product order in order to meet the expected lead times, to significant inventory write-offs and manufacturing inefficiencies that decrease our gross margin. Any of these factors could materially and adversely affect our financial results for a particular quarter and could cause those results to differ materially from financial forecasts we have previously provided. We provide these forecasts with the intent of giving investors and analysts a better understanding of management's expectations for the future, but parties reviewing such forecasts must recognize that such forecasts are comprised of, and are themselves, forward-looking statements subject to the risks and uncertainties described in this Item 1A and elsewhere in this report and in our other public filings and public statements. If our operating or financial results for a particular period differ from our forecasts or the expectations of investment analysts, or if we revise our forecasts, the market price of our common stock could decline.
Ongoing changes in the technology industry, as well as the semiconductor industry in particular, could expose our business to significant risks.
The semiconductor equipment industry and other industries that we serve are constantly developing and changing over time. Many of the risks associated with operating in these industries are comparable to the risks faced by all technology companies, such as the uncertainty of future growth rates in the industries that we serve, pricing trends in the end-markets for consumer electronics and other products (which place a growing emphasis on our customers' cost of ownership), changes in our customers' capital spending patterns and, in general, an environment of constant change and development, including decreasing product and component dimensions; use of new materials; and increasingly complex device structures, applications and process steps. If we fail to appropriately adjust our cost structure and operations to adapt to any of these trends, or, with respect to
15
technological advances, if we do not timely develop new technologies and products that successfully anticipate and address these changes, we could experience a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.
In addition, we face a number of risks specific to ongoing changes in the semiconductor industry, as the significant majority of our sales are made to semiconductor manufacturers. Some of the trends that our management monitors in operating our business include the following:
|
•
|
the increasing cost of building and operating fabrication facilities and the impact of such increases on our customers’ investment decisions;
|
|
•
|
differing market growth rates and capital requirements for different applications, such as memory, logic and foundry;
|
|
•
|
the emergence of disruptive technologies that change the prevailing semiconductor manufacturing processes (or the economics associated with semiconductor manufacturing) and, as a result, also impact the inspection and metrology requirements associated with such processes;
|
|
•
|
the possible introduction of integrated products by our larger competitors that offer inspection and metrology functionality in addition to managing other semiconductor manufacturing processes;
|
|
•
|
changes in semiconductor manufacturing processes that are extremely costly for our customers to implement and, accordingly, impact the amount of their budgets that are available for process control equipment;
|
|
•
|
the bifurcation of the semiconductor manufacturing industry into (a) leading edge manufacturers driving continued research and development into next-generation products and technologies and (b) other manufacturers that are content with existing (including previous generation) products and technologies;
|
|
•
|
the ever escalating cost of next-generation product development, which may result in joint development programs between us and our customers to help fund such programs that could restrict our control of, ownership of and profitability from the products and technologies developed through those programs;
|
|
•
|
the potential industry transition from 300mm to 450mm wafers; and
|
|
•
|
the entry by some semiconductor manufacturers into collaboration or sharing arrangements for capacity, cost or risk with other manufacturers, as well as increased outsourcing of their manufacturing activities, and greater focus only on specific markets or applications, whether in response to adverse market conditions or other market pressures.
|
Any of the changes described above may negatively affect our customers’ rate of investment in the capital equipment that we produce, which could result in downward pressure on our prices, customer orders, revenues and gross margins. If we do not successfully manage the risks resulting from any of these or other potential changes in our industries, our business, financial condition and operating results could be adversely impacted.
We are exposed to risks associated with a highly concentrated customer base.
Our customer base, particularly in the semiconductor industry, historically has been, and is becoming increasingly, highly concentrated. In this environment, orders from a relatively limited number of manufacturers have accounted for, and are expected to continue to account for, a substantial portion of our sales. In addition, the mix and type of customers, and sales to any single customer, may vary significantly from quarter to quarter and from year to year. If customers do not place orders, or they delay or cancel orders, we may not be able to replace the business. Furthermore, because our products are configured to customer specifications, any changes, delays or cancellations of orders may result in significant, non-recoverable costs. As a result of the consolidation within our customer base, the customers that survive that consolidation represent a greater portion of our sales. Those surviving customers may have more aggressive policies regarding engaging alternative, second-source suppliers for the products we serve and, in addition, may seek, and on occasion receive, pricing, payment, intellectual property-related, or other commercial terms that are less favorable to us. Any of these changes could negatively impact our prices, customer orders, revenues and gross margins. Also, certain customers have undergone significant ownership changes, experienced management changes or have outsourced manufacturing activities, any of which may result in additional complexities in managing customer relationships and transactions. As a result of the challenging economic environment during fiscal year 2009, we were (and in some cases continue to be) exposed to additional risks related to the continued financial viability of certain of our customers. To the extent our customers experience liquidity issues in the future, we may be required to incur additional bad debt expense with respect to receivables owed to us by those customers. In addition, customers with liquidity issues may be forced to discontinue operations or may be acquired by one of our customers, and in either case such event would have the effect of further consolidating our customer base. Any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.
16
Risks Related to Our Business Model and Capital Structure
If we do not develop and introduce new products and technologies in a timely manner in response to changing market conditions or customer requirements, our business could be seriously harmed.
Success in the semiconductor equipment industry depends, in part, on continual improvement of existing technologies and rapid innovation of new solutions. For example, the size of semiconductor devices continues to shrink, and the industry is currently transitioning to the use of new materials and innovative fab processes. While we expect these trends will increase our customers’ reliance on diagnostic products such as ours, we cannot be sure that these trends will directly improve our business. These and other evolving customer needs require us to respond with continued development programs and to cut back or discontinue older programs, which may no longer have industry-wide support. Technical innovations are inherently complex and require long development cycles and appropriate staffing of highly qualified employees. Our competitive advantage and future business success depend on our ability to accurately predict evolving industry standards, to develop and introduce new products that successfully address changing customer needs, to win market acceptance of these new products and to manufacture these new products in a timely and cost-effective manner.
In this environment, we must continue to make significant investments in research and development in order to enhance the performance, features and functionality of our products, to keep pace with competitive products and to satisfy customer demands. Substantial research and development costs typically are incurred before we confirm the technical feasibility and commercial viability of a new product, and not all development activities result in commercially viable products. There can be no assurance that revenues from future products or product enhancements will be sufficient to recover the development costs associated with such products or enhancements. In addition, we cannot be sure that these products or enhancements will receive market acceptance or that we will be able to sell these products at prices that are favorable to us. Our business will be seriously harmed if we are unable to sell our products at favorable prices or if the market in which we operate does not accept our products.
In addition, the complexity of our products exposes us to other risks. We regularly recognize revenue from a sale upon shipment of the applicable product to the customer (even before receiving the customer's formal acceptance of that product) in certain situations, including sales of products for which installation is considered perfunctory, transactions in which the product is sold to an independent distributor and we have no installation obligations, and sales of products where we have previously delivered the same product to the same customer location and that prior delivery has been accepted. However, our products are very technologically complex and rely on the interconnection of numerous subcomponents (all of which must perform to their respective specifications), so it is conceivable that a product for which we recognize revenue upon shipment may ultimately fail to meet the overall product's required specifications. In such a situation, the customer may be entitled to certain remedies, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results for various periods and, as a result, our stock price.
Our success is dependent in part on our technology and other proprietary rights. If we are unable to maintain our lead or protect our proprietary technology, we may lose valuable assets.
Our success is dependent in part on our technology and other proprietary rights. We own various United States and international patents and have additional pending patent applications relating to some of our products and technologies. The process of seeking patent protection is lengthy and expensive, and we cannot be certain that pending or future applications will actually result in issued patents or that issued patents will be of sufficient scope or strength to provide meaningful protection or commercial advantage to us. Other companies and individuals, including our larger competitors, may develop technologies and obtain patents relating to our business that are similar or superior to our technology or may design around the patents we own, adversely affecting our business. In addition, we at times engage in collaborative technology development efforts with our customers and suppliers, and these collaborations may constitute a key component of certain of our ongoing technology and product research and development projects. The termination of any such collaboration, or delays caused by disputes or other unanticipated challenges that may arise in connection with any such collaboration, could significantly impair our research and development efforts, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and operations.
We also maintain trademarks on certain of our products and services and claim copyright protection for certain proprietary software and documentation. However, we can give no assurance that our trademarks and copyrights will be upheld or successfully deter infringement by third parties.
While patent, copyright and trademark protection for our intellectual property is important, we believe our future success in highly dynamic markets is most dependent upon the technical competence and creative skills of our personnel. We attempt to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information through confidentiality and other agreements with our customers, suppliers, employees and consultants and through other security measures. We also maintain exclusive and non-exclusive licenses with third parties for strategic technology used in certain products. However, these employees, consultants and third parties may breach these agreements, and we may not have adequate remedies for wrongdoing. In addition, the laws of certain
17
territories in which we develop, manufacture or sell our products may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. In any event, the extent to which we can protect our trade secrets through the use of confidentiality agreements is limited, and our success will depend to a significant extent on our ability to innovate ahead of our competitors.
Our future performance depends, in part, upon our ability to continue to compete successfully worldwide.
Our industry includes large manufacturers with substantial resources to support customers worldwide. Some of our competitors are diversified companies with greater financial resources and more extensive research, engineering, manufacturing, marketing, and customer service and support capabilities than we possess. We face competition from companies whose strategy is to provide a broad array of products and services, 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, including pricing such competitive tools significantly below our product offerings. In addition, we face competition from smaller emerging semiconductor equipment companies whose strategy is to provide a portion of the products and services that we offer, using innovative technology to sell products into specialized markets. The strength of our competitive positions in many of our existing markets is largely due to our leading technology, which is the result of continuing significant investments in product research and development. However, we may enter new markets, whether through acquisitions or new internal product development, in which competition is based primarily on product pricing, not technological superiority. Further, some new growth markets that emerge may not require leading technologies. Loss of competitive position in any of the markets we serve, or an inability to sell our products on favorable commercial terms in new markets we may enter, could negatively affect our prices, customer orders, revenues, gross margins and market share, any of which would negatively affect our operating results and financial condition.
Our business would be harmed if we do not receive parts sufficient in number and performance to meet our production requirements and product specifications in a timely and cost-effective manner.
We use a wide range of materials in the production of our products, including custom electronic and mechanical components, and we use numerous suppliers to supply these materials. We generally do not have guaranteed supply arrangements with our suppliers. Because of the variability and uniqueness of customers’ orders, we do not maintain an extensive inventory of materials for manufacturing. Through our business interruption planning, we seek to minimize the risk of production and service interruptions and/or shortages of key parts by, among other things, monitoring the financial stability of key suppliers, identifying (but not necessarily qualifying) possible alternative suppliers and maintaining appropriate inventories of key parts. Although we make reasonable efforts to ensure that parts are available from multiple suppliers, key parts may be available only from a single supplier or a limited group of suppliers. Also, key parts we obtain from some of our suppliers incorporate the suppliers’ proprietary intellectual property; in those cases we are increasingly reliant on third parties for high-performance, high-technology components, which reduces the amount of control we have over the availability and protection of the technology and intellectual property that is used in our products. In addition, if certain of our key suppliers experience liquidity issues and are forced to discontinue operations, which is a heightened risk during economic downturns, that would affect their ability to deliver parts and could result in delays for our products. Our operating results and business may be adversely impacted if we are unable to obtain parts to meet our production requirements and product specifications, or if we are only able to do so on unfavorable terms.
If we fail to operate our business in accordance with our business plan, our operating results, business and stock price may be significantly and adversely impacted.
We attempt to operate our business in accordance with a business plan that is established annually, revised frequently (generally quarterly), and reviewed by management even more frequently (at least monthly). Our business plan is developed based on a number of factors, many of which require estimates and assumptions, such as our expectations of the economic environment, future business levels, our customers’ willingness and ability to place orders, lead-times, and future revenue and cash flow. Our budgeted operating expenses, for example, are based in part on our future revenue expectations. However, our ability to achieve our anticipated revenue levels is a function of numerous factors, including the volatile and cyclical nature of our industry, customer order cancellations, macroeconomic changes, operational matters regarding particular agreements, our ability to manage customer deliveries and resources for the installation and acceptance of our products (for products where customer acceptance is required before we can recognize revenue from such sales), our ability to manage delays or accelerations by customers in taking deliveries and the acceptance of our products (for products where customer acceptance is required before we can recognize revenue from such sales), our ability to operate our business and sales processes effectively, and a number of the other risk factors set forth in this Item 1A.
18
Because our expenses are in most cases relatively fixed in the short term, any revenue shortfall below expectations could have an immediate and significant adverse effect on our operating results. Similarly, if we fail to manage our expenses effectively or otherwise fail to maintain rigorous cost controls, we could experience greater than anticipated expenses during an operating period, which would also negatively affect our results of operations. If we fail to operate our business consistent with our business plan, our operating results in any period may be significantly and adversely impacted. Such an outcome could cause customers, suppliers or investors to view us as less stable, or could cause us to fail to meet financial analysts’ revenue or earnings estimates, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition or stock price.
There can be no assurance that we will continue to declare cash dividends at all or in any particular amounts.
Our Board of Directors first instituted a quarterly dividend during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. Since that time, we have announced several increases in the amount of our quarterly dividend level. We intend to continue to pay quarterly dividends subject to capital availability and periodic determinations by our Board of Directors that cash dividends are in the best interest of our stockholders and are in compliance with all laws and agreements applicable to the declaration and payment of cash dividends by us. Future dividends may be affected by, among other factors: our views on potential future capital requirements for investments in acquisitions and the funding of our research and development; legal risks; stock repurchase programs; changes in federal and state income tax laws or corporate laws; and changes to our business model. Our dividend payments may change from time to time, and we cannot provide assurance that we will continue to declare dividends at all or in any particular amounts. A reduction in our dividend payments could have a negative effect on our stock price.
There are risks associated with our outstanding indebtedness.
As of
June 30, 2011
, we had
$750 million
aggregate principal amount of outstanding indebtedness represented by our senior notes that will mature in 2018, and we may incur additional indebtedness in the future. Our ability to pay interest and repay the principal for our indebtedness is dependent upon our ability to manage our business operations and the other risk factors discussed in this section. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage any of these risks successfully.
In addition, changes by any rating agency to our outlook or credit rating could negatively affect the value and liquidity of both our debt and equity securities. Factors that can affect our credit rating include changes in our operating performance, the economic environment, conditions in the semiconductor and semiconductor equipment industries, our financial position, and changes in our business strategy.
In certain circumstances involving a change of control followed by a downgrade of the rating of our senior notes, we will be required to make an offer to repurchase the senior notes at a purchase price equal to 101% of the aggregate principal amount of the notes repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest. We cannot make any assurance that we will have sufficient financial resources at such time or will be able to arrange financing to pay the repurchase price of the senior notes. Our ability to repurchase the senior notes in such event may be limited by law, by the indenture associated with the senior notes, or by the terms of other agreements to which we may be party at such time. If we fail to repurchase the senior notes as required by the indenture, it would constitute an event of default under the indenture governing the senior notes which, in turn, may also constitute an event of default under other of our obligations.
We are exposed to risks related to our commercial terms and conditions, including our indemnification of third parties, as well as the performance of our products.
Although our standard commercial documentation sets forth the terms and conditions that we intend to apply to commercial transactions with our business partners, counterparties to such transactions may not explicitly agree to our terms and conditions. In situations where we engage in business with a third party without an explicit master agreement regarding the applicable terms and conditions, or where the commercial documentation applicable to the transaction is subject to varying interpretations, we may have disputes with those third parties regarding the applicable terms and conditions of our business relationship with them. Such disputes could lead to a deterioration of our commercial relationship with those parties, costly and time-consuming litigation, or additional concessions or obligations being offered by us to resolve such disputes, or could impact our revenue or cost recognition. Any of these outcomes could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, in our commercial agreements, from time to time in the normal course of business we indemnify third parties with whom we enter into contractual relationships, including customers and lessors, with respect to certain matters. We have agreed, under certain conditions, to hold these third parties harmless against specified losses, such as those arising from a breach of representations or covenants, other third party claims that our products when used for their intended purposes infringe the intellectual property rights of such other third parties, or other claims made against certain parties. We may be compelled to enter into or accrue for probable settlements of alleged indemnification obligations, or we may be subject to potential liability arising from our customers’ involvements in legal disputes. In addition, notwithstanding the provisions related to limitations on
19
our liability that we seek to include in our business agreements, the counterparties to such agreements may dispute our interpretation or application of such provisions, and a court of law may not interpret or apply such provisions in our favor, any of which could result in an obligation for us to pay material damages to third parties and engage in costly legal proceedings. It is difficult to determine the maximum potential amount of liability under any indemnification obligations, whether or not asserted, due to our limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances that are likely to be involved in any particular claim. Our business, financial condition and results of operations in a reported fiscal period could be materially and adversely affected if we expend significant amounts in defending or settling any purported claims, regardless of their merit or outcomes.
We are also exposed to potential costs associated with unexpected product performance issues. Our products and production processes are extremely complex and thus could contain unexpected product defects, especially when products are first introduced. Unexpected product performance issues could result in significant costs being incurred by us, including increased service or warranty costs, providing product replacements for (or modifications to) defective products, litigation related to defective products, product recalls, or product write-offs or disposal costs. These costs could be substantial and could have an adverse impact upon our business, financial condition and operating results. In addition, our reputation with our customers could be damaged as a result of such product defects, which could reduce demand for our products and negatively impact our business.
There are risks associated with our receipt of government funding for research and development.
We are exposed to additional risks related to our receipt of external funding for certain strategic development programs from various governments and government agencies, both domestically and internationally. Governments and government agencies typically have the right to terminate funding programs at any time in their sole discretion, so there is no assurance that these sources of external funding will continue to be available to us in the future. In addition, under the terms of these government grants, the applicable granting agency typically has the right to audit the costs that we incur, directly and indirectly, in connection with such programs. Any such audit could result in modifications to, or even termination of, the applicable government funding program. For example, if an audit were to identify any costs as being improperly allocated to the applicable program, those costs would not be reimbursed, and any such costs that had already been reimbursed would have to be refunded. We do not know the outcome of any future audits. Any adverse finding resulting from any such audit could lead to penalties (financial or otherwise), termination of funding programs, suspension of payments, fines and suspension or prohibition from receiving future government funding from the applicable government or government agency, any of which could adversely impact our operating results, financial condition and ability to operate our business.
We have recorded significant restructuring, inventory write-off and asset impairment charges in the past and may do so again in the future, which could have a material negative impact on our business.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, we recorded material restructuring charges of $38.7 million related to our global workforce reduction, large excess inventory write-offs of $85.6 million, and material impairment charges of $446.7 million related to our goodwill and purchased intangible assets. If we were to encounter challenging economic conditions once again, we may implement additional cost reduction actions, which would require us to take additional, potentially material, restructuring charges related to, among other things, employee terminations or exit costs. We may also be required to write off additional inventory if our product build plans or usage of service inventory decline, and such additional write-offs could constitute material charges.
As noted above, we recorded a material charge during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 related to the impairment of our goodwill and purchased intangible assets. Goodwill represents the excess of costs over the net fair value of net assets acquired in a business combination. Goodwill is not amortized, but is instead tested for impairment at least annually in accordance with authoritative guidance for goodwill. Purchased intangible assets with estimable useful lives are amortized over their respective estimated useful lives using the straight-line method, and are reviewed for impairment in accordance with authoritative guidance for long-lived assets. The valuation of goodwill and intangible assets requires assumptions and estimates of many critical factors, including revenue and market growth, operating cash flows, market multiples, and discount rates. A substantial decline in our stock price, or any other adverse change in market conditions, particularly if such change has the effect of changing one of the critical assumptions or estimates we previously used to calculate the value of our goodwill or intangible assets (and, as applicable, the amount of any previous impairment charge), could result in a change to the estimation of fair value that could result in an additional impairment charge.
Any such additional material charges, whether related to restructuring or goodwill or purchased intangible asset impairment, may have a material negative impact on our operating results and related financial statements.
20
We are exposed to risks related to our financial arrangements with respect to receivables factoring and banking arrangements.
We enter into factoring arrangements with financial institutions to sell certain of our trade receivables and promissory notes from customers without recourse. In addition, we maintain bank accounts with several domestic and foreign financial institutions, any of which may prove not to be financially viable. If we were to stop entering into these factoring arrangements, our operating results, financial condition and cash flows could be adversely impacted by delays or failures in collecting trade receivables. However, by entering into these arrangements, and by engaging these financial institutions for banking services, we are exposed to additional risks. If any of these financial institutions experiences financial difficulties or is otherwise unable to honor the terms of our factoring or deposit arrangements, we may experience material financial losses due to the failure of such arrangements or a lack of access to our funds, any of which could have an adverse impact upon our operating results, financial condition and cash flows.
We are subject to the risks of additional government actions in the event we were to breach the terms of any settlement arrangement into which we have entered.
In connection with the settlement of certain government actions and other legal proceedings related to our historical stock option practices, we have explicitly agreed as a condition to such settlements that we will comply with certain laws, such as the books and records provisions of the federal securities laws. If we were to violate any such law, we might not only be subject to the significant penalties applicable to such violation, but our past settlements may also be impacted by such violation, which could give rise to additional government actions or other legal proceedings. Any such additional actions or proceedings may require us to expend significant management time and incur significant accounting, legal and other expenses, and may divert attention and resources from the operation of our business. These expenditures and diversions, as well as an adverse resolution of any such action or proceeding, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
General Commercial, Operational, Financial and Regulatory Risks
We are exposed to risks associated with a weakening in the condition of the financial markets and the global economy.
The severe tightening of the credit markets, turmoil in the financial markets and weakening of the global economy that were experienced during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 contributed to slowdowns in the industries in which we operate, which slowdowns could recur or worsen if economic conditions were to deteriorate again.
The markets for semiconductors, and therefore our business, are ultimately driven by the global demand for electronic devices by consumers and businesses. Economic uncertainty frequently leads to reduced consumer and business spending, which caused our customers to decrease, cancel or delay their equipment and service orders from us in the economic slowdown during fiscal year 2009. In addition, the tightening of credit markets and concerns regarding the availability of credit that accompanied that slowdown made it more difficult for our customers to raise capital, whether debt or equity, to finance their purchases of capital equipment, including the products we sell. Reduced demand, combined with delays in our customers’ ability to obtain financing (or the unavailability of such financing), has at times in the past several years adversely affected our product and service sales and revenues and therefore has harmed our business and operating results, and our operating results and financial condition may again be adversely impacted if economic conditions decline from their current levels.
In addition, a decline in the condition of the global financial markets could adversely impact the market values or liquidity of our investments. Our investment portfolio includes corporate and government securities, money market funds and other types of debt and equity investments. Although we believe our portfolio continues to be comprised of sound investments due to the quality and (where applicable) credit ratings and government guarantees of the underlying investments, a decline in the capital and financial markets would adversely impact the market value of our investments and their liquidity. If the market value of such investments were to decline, or if we were to have to sell some of our investments under illiquid market conditions, we may be required to recognize an impairment charge on such investments or a loss on such sales, either of which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.
If we are unable to timely and appropriately adapt to changes resulting from difficult macroeconomic conditions, our business, financial condition or results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.
21
A majority of our annual revenues are derived from outside the United States, and we maintain significant operations outside the United States. We are exposed to numerous risks as a result of the international nature of our business and operations.
A majority of our annual revenues are derived from outside the United States, and we maintain significant operations outside the United States. We expect that these conditions will continue in the foreseeable future. Managing global operations and sites located throughout the world presents a number of challenges, including but not limited to:
|
•
|
managing cultural diversity and organizational alignment;
|
|
•
|
exposure to the unique characteristics of each region in the global semiconductor market, which can cause capital equipment investment patterns to vary significantly from period to period;
|
|
•
|
periodic local or international economic downturns;
|
|
•
|
potential adverse tax consequences, including withholding tax rules that may limit the repatriation of our earnings, and higher effective income tax rates in foreign countries where we do business;
|
|
•
|
government controls, either by the United States or other countries, that restrict our business overseas or the import or export of semiconductor products or increase the cost of our operations;
|
|
•
|
tariffs or other trade barriers (including those applied to our products or to parts and supplies that we purchase);
|
|
•
|
political instability, natural disasters, legal or regulatory changes, acts of war or terrorism in regions where we have operations or where we do business;
|
|
•
|
fluctuations in interest and currency exchange rates (Although we attempt to manage near-term currency risks through the use of hedging instruments, there can be no assurance that such efforts will be adequate);
|
|
•
|
longer payment cycles and difficulties in collecting accounts receivable outside of the United States;
|
|
•
|
difficulties in managing foreign distributors (including monitoring and ensuring our distributors' compliance with all applicable United States and local laws); and
|
|
•
|
inadequate protection or enforcement of our intellectual property and other legal rights in foreign jurisdictions.
|
Any of the factors above could have a significant negative impact on our business and results of operations.
We might be involved in intellectual property disputes or other intellectual property infringement claims that may be costly to resolve, prevent us from selling or using the challenged technology and seriously harm our operating results and financial condition.
As is typical in the semiconductor equipment industry, from time to time we have received communications from other parties asserting the existence of patent rights, copyrights, trademark rights or other intellectual property rights which they believe cover certain of our products, processes, technologies or information. In addition, we occasionally receive notification from customers who believe that we owe them indemnification or other obligations related to intellectual property claims made against such customers by third parties. Litigation tends to be expensive and requires significant management time and attention and could have a negative effect on our results of operations or business if we lose or have to settle a case on significantly adverse terms. Our customary practice is to evaluate such infringement assertions and to consider whether to seek licenses where appropriate. However, we cannot ensure that licenses can be obtained or, if obtained, will be on acceptable terms or that costly litigation or other administrative proceedings will not occur. The inability to obtain necessary licenses or other rights on reasonable terms, or the instigation of litigation or other administrative proceedings, could seriously harm our operating results and financial condition.
We are exposed to various risks related to the legal (including environmental), regulatory and tax environments in which we perform our operations and conduct our business.
We are subject to various risks related to compliance with new, existing, different, inconsistent or even conflicting laws, rules and regulations enacted by legislative bodies and/or regulatory agencies in the countries in which we operate and with which we must comply, including environmental, safety, antitrust, anti-corruption/anti-bribery and export control regulations. Our failure or inability to comply with existing or future laws, rules or regulations, or changes to existing laws, rules or regulations (including changes that result in inconsistent or conflicting laws, rules or regulations), in the countries in which we operate could result in violations of contractual or regulatory obligations that may adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and ability to conduct our business.
Our properties and many aspects of our business operations are subject to various domestic and international environmental laws and regulations, including those that control and restrict the use, transportation, emission, discharge, storage and disposal of certain chemicals, gases and other substances. Any failure to comply with applicable environmental laws, regulations or requirements may subject us to a range of consequences, including fines, suspension of certain of our business activities, limitations on our ability to sell our products, obligations to remediate environmental contamination, and criminal and civil liabilities or other sanctions. In addition, changes in environmental regulations (including regulations
22
relating to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions) could require us to invest in potentially costly pollution control equipment, alter our manufacturing processes or use substitute (potentially more expensive and/or rarer) materials. Further, we use hazardous and other regulated materials that subject us to risks of strict liability for damages caused by any release, regardless of fault. We also face increasing complexity in our manufacturing, product design and procurement operations as we adjust to new and prospective requirements relating to the materials composition of our products, including restrictions on lead and other substances and requirements to track the sources of certain metals and other materials. The cost of complying, or of failing to comply, with these and other regulatory restrictions or contractual obligations could adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and ability to conduct our business.
In addition, we may from time to time be involved in legal proceedings or claims regarding employment, contracts, product performance, product liability, antitrust, environmental regulations, securities, unfair competition and other matters (in addition to proceedings and claims related to intellectual property matters, which are separately discussed elsewhere in this Item 1A). These legal proceedings and claims, regardless of their merit, may be time-consuming and expensive to prosecute or defend, divert management’s attention and resources, and/or inhibit our ability to sell our products. There can be no assurance regarding the outcome of current or future legal proceedings or claims, which could adversely affect our operating results, financial condition and ability to operate our business.
We depend on key personnel to manage our business effectively, and if we are unable to attract, retain and motivate our key employees, our sales and product development could be harmed.
Our employees are vital to our success, and our key management, engineering and other employees are difficult to replace. We generally do not have employment contracts with our key employees. Further, we do not maintain key person life insurance on any of our employees. The expansion of high technology companies worldwide has increased demand and competition for qualified personnel. If we are unable to retain key personnel, or if we are not able to attract, assimilate and retain additional highly qualified employees to meet our needs in the future, our business and operations could be harmed.
We outsource a number of services to third-party service providers, which decreases our control over the performance of these functions. Disruptions or delays at our third-party service providers could adversely impact our operations.
We outsource a number of services, including our transportation and logistics management of spare parts and certain accounting functions, to domestic and overseas third-party service providers. While outsourcing arrangements may lower our cost of operations, they also reduce our direct control over the services rendered. It is uncertain what effect such diminished control will have on the quality or quantity of products delivered or services rendered, on our ability to quickly respond to changing market conditions, or on our ability to ensure compliance with all applicable domestic and foreign laws and regulations. If we do not effectively develop and manage our outsourcing strategies, if required export and other governmental approvals are not timely obtained, if our third-party service providers do not perform as anticipated, or if there are delays or difficulties in enhancing business processes, we may experience operational difficulties (such as limitations on our ability to ship products), increased costs, manufacturing or service interruptions or delays, loss of intellectual property rights, quality and compliance issues, and challenges in managing our product inventory or recording and reporting financial and management information, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We rely upon certain critical information systems for our daily business operation. Our inability to use or access these information systems at critical points in time could unfavorably impact the timeliness and efficiency of our business operations.
Our global operations are linked by information systems, including telecommunications, the internet, our corporate intranet, network communications, email and various computer hardware and software applications. Despite our implementation of network security measures, our tools and servers are vulnerable to computer viruses, break-ins and similar disruptions from unauthorized tampering with our computer systems and tools located at customer sites, or could be subject to system failures or malfunctions for other reasons. System failures or malfunctioning, such as difficulties with our customer relationship management (“CRM”) system, could disrupt our operations and our ability to timely and accurately process and report key components of our financial results. Our enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system is integral to our ability to accurately and efficiently maintain our books and records, record transactions, provide critical information to our management, and prepare our financial statements. Any disruptions or difficulties that may occur in connection with our ERP system or other systems (whether in connection with the regular operation, periodic enhancements, modifications or upgrades of such systems or the integration of our acquired businesses into such systems) could adversely affect our ability to complete important business processes, such as the evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Any such event could have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition.
23
Acquisitions are an important element of our strategy but, because of the uncertainties involved, we may not find suitable acquisition candidates and we may not be able to successfully integrate and manage acquired businesses. We are also exposed to risks in connection with strategic alliances into which we may enter.
In addition to our efforts to develop new technologies from internal sources, part of our growth strategy is to pursue acquisitions and acquire new technologies from external sources. As part of this effort, we may make acquisitions of, or significant investments in, businesses with complementary products, services and/or technologies. There can be no assurance that we will find suitable acquisition candidates or that acquisitions we complete will be successful. In addition, we may use equity to finance future acquisitions, which would increase our number of shares outstanding and be dilutive to current stockholders.
If we are unable to successfully integrate and manage acquired businesses or if acquired businesses perform poorly, then our business and financial results may suffer. It is possible that the businesses we have acquired, as well as businesses that we may acquire in the future, may perform worse than expected or prove to be more difficult to integrate and manage than expected. In addition, we may lose key employees of the acquired companies. As a result, risks associated with acquisition transactions may give rise to a material adverse effect on our business and financial results for a number of reasons, including:
|
•
|
we may have to devote unanticipated financial and management resources to acquired businesses;
|
|
•
|
the combination of businesses may cause the loss of key personnel or an interruption of, or loss of momentum in, the activities of our company and/or the acquired business;
|
|
•
|
we may not be able to realize expected operating efficiencies or product integration benefits from our acquisitions;
|
|
•
|
we may experience challenges in entering into new market segments for which we have not previously manufactured and sold products;
|
|
•
|
we may face difficulties in coordinating geographically separated organizations, systems and facilities;
|
|
•
|
the customers, distributors, suppliers, employees and others with whom the companies we acquire have business dealings may have a potentially adverse reaction to the acquisition;
|
|
•
|
we may have to write-off goodwill or other intangible assets; and
|
|
•
|
we may incur unforeseen obligations or liabilities in connection with acquisitions.
|
At times, we may also enter into strategic alliances with customers, suppliers or other business partners with respect to development of technology and intellectual property. These alliances typically require significant investments of capital and exchange of proprietary, highly sensitive information. The success of these alliances depends on various factors over which we may have limited or no control and requires ongoing and effective cooperation with our strategic partners. Mergers and acquisitions and strategic alliances are inherently subject to significant risks, and the inability to effectively manage these risks could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
Disruption of our manufacturing facilities or other operations, or in the operations of our customers, due to earthquake, flood, other natural catastrophic events, health epidemics or terrorism could result in cancellation of orders, delays in deliveries or other business activities, or loss of customers and could seriously harm our business.
We have significant manufacturing operations in the United States, Singapore, Israel, Belgium and Germany. In addition, our business is international in nature, with our sales, service and administrative personnel and our customers located in numerous countries throughout the world. Operations at our manufacturing facilities and our assembly subcontractors, as well as our other operations and those of our customers, are subject to disruption for a variety of reasons, including work stoppages, acts of war, terrorism, health epidemics, fire, earthquake, volcanic eruptions, energy shortages, flooding or other natural disasters. Such disruption could cause delays in, among other things, shipments of products to our customers, our ability to perform services requested by our customers, or the installation and acceptance of our products at customer sites. We cannot ensure that alternate means of conducting our operations (whether through alternate production capacity or service providers or otherwise) would be available if a major disruption were to occur or that, if such alternate means were available, they could be obtained on favorable terms.
For example, recent events in Japan, including earthquakes, tsunamis and the related damage, have affected the operations of some of our customers and suppliers in that region, and may also have impacted the operations of some of our customers' other suppliers (which could impact our customers' desire to proceed with broad-based facility upgrades and related equipment purchases) or some of our suppliers' suppliers (which could impact our suppliers' ability to deliver their products to us in a timely manner). In the coming quarters, the recent events in Japan could result in delays in orders and deliveries and the other effects described earlier in this paragraph, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
24
In addition, as part of our cost-cutting actions, we have consolidated several operating facilities. Our California operations are now primarily centralized in our Milpitas facility. The consolidation of our California operations into a single campus could further concentrate the risks related to any of the disruptive events described above, such as acts of war or terrorism, earthquakes, fires or other natural disasters, if any such event were to impact our Milpitas facility.
We are predominantly uninsured for losses and interruptions caused by terrorist acts and acts of war. If international political instability continues or increases, our business and results of operations could be harmed.
The threat of terrorism targeted at, or acts of war in, the regions of the world in which we do business increases the uncertainty in our markets. Any act of terrorism or war that affects the economy or the semiconductor industry could adversely affect our business. Increased international political instability in various parts of the world, disruption in air transportation and further enhanced security measures as a result of terrorist attacks may hinder our ability to do business and may increase our costs of operations. We maintain significant manufacturing and research and development operations in Israel, an area that has historically experienced a high degree of political instability, and we are therefore exposed to risks associated with future instability in that region. Such instability could directly impact our ability to operate our business (or our customers' ability to operate their business) in the affected region, cause us to incur increased costs in transportation, make such transportation unreliable, increase our insurance costs, and cause international currency markets to fluctuate. This same instability could have the same effects on our suppliers and their ability to timely deliver their products. If international political instability continues or increases in any region in which we do business, our business and results of operations could be harmed. We are predominantly uninsured for losses and interruptions caused by terrorist acts and acts of war.
We self insure certain risks including earthquake risk. If one or more of the uninsured events occurs, we could suffer major financial loss.
We purchase insurance to help mitigate the economic impact of certain insurable risks; however, certain other risks are uninsurable or are insurable only at significant cost or cannot be mitigated with insurance. An earthquake could significantly disrupt our manufacturing operations, a significant portion of which are conducted in California, an area highly susceptible to earthquakes. It could also significantly delay our research and engineering efforts on new products, much of which is also conducted in California. We take steps to minimize the damage that would be caused by an earthquake, but there is no certainty that our efforts will prove successful in the event of an earthquake. We self insure earthquake risks because we believe this is a prudent financial decision based on our large cash reserves and the high cost and limited coverage available in the earthquake insurance market. Certain other risks are also self-insured either based on a similar cost-benefit analysis, or based on the unavailability of insurance. If one or more of the uninsured events occurs, we could suffer major financial loss.
We are exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations. Although we hedge certain currency risks, we may still be adversely affected by changes in foreign currency exchange rates or declining economic conditions in these countries.
We have some exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily the Euro and the Japanese Yen. We have international subsidiaries that operate and sell our products globally. In addition, an increasing proportion of our manufacturing activities are conducted outside of the United States, and many of the costs associated with such activities are denominated in foreign currencies. We routinely hedge our exposures to certain foreign currencies with various financial institutions in an effort to minimize the impact of certain currency exchange rate fluctuations, but these hedges may be inadequate to protect us from currency exchange rate fluctuations. To the extent that these hedges are inadequate, or if there are significant currency exchange rate fluctuations in currencies for which we do not have hedges in place, our reported financial results or the way we conduct our business could be adversely affected. Furthermore, if a financial counterparty to our hedges experiences financial difficulties or is otherwise unable to honor the terms of the foreign currency hedge, we may experience material financial losses.
We are exposed to fluctuations in interest rates and the market values of our portfolio investments; impairment of our investments could harm our earnings. In addition, we and our stockholders are exposed to risks related to the volatility of the market for our common stock.
Our investment portfolio primarily consists of both corporate and government debt securities that have a maximum effective maturity of three years. The longer the duration of these securities, the more susceptible they are to changes in market interest rates and bond yields. As market interest rates and bond yields increase, those securities with a lower yield-at-cost show a mark-to-market unrealized loss. We have the ability to realize the full value of all these investments upon maturity. However, an impairment of the fair market value of our investments, even if unrealized, must be reflected in our financial statements for the applicable period and may therefore have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for that period.
25
In addition, the market price for our common stock is volatile and has fluctuated significantly during recent years. The trading price of our common stock could continue to be highly volatile and fluctuate widely in response to various factors, including without limitation conditions in the semiconductor industry and other industries in which we operate, fluctuations in the global economy or capital markets, our operating results or other performance metrics, or adverse consequences experienced by us as a result of any of the risks described elsewhere in this Item 1A. Volatility in the market price of our common stock could cause an investor in our common stock to experience a loss on the value of their investment in us and could also adversely impact our ability to raise capital through the sale of our common stock or to use our common stock as consideration to acquire other companies.
We are exposed to risks in connection with tax audits in various jurisdictions.
We are subject to tax audits in various jurisdictions, and such jurisdictions may assess additional income or other taxes against us. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, the final determination of tax audits and any related litigation could be materially different from our historical income tax provisions and accruals. The results of an audit or litigation could have a material adverse effect on our operating results or cash flows in the period or periods for which that determination is made.
A change in our effective tax rate can have a significant adverse impact on our business.
A number of factors may adversely impact our future effective tax rates, such as the jurisdictions in which our profits are determined to be earned and taxed; the resolution of issues arising from tax audits with various tax authorities; changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and liabilities; adjustments to estimated taxes upon finalization of various tax returns; increases in expenses not deductible for tax purposes, including write-offs of acquired in-process research and development and impairment of goodwill in connection with acquisitions; changes in available tax credits; changes in stock-based compensation expense; changes in tax laws or the interpretation of such tax laws (for example, proposals for fundamental United States international tax reform; changes in generally accepted accounting principles; and the repatriation of earnings from outside the United States for which we have not previously provided for United States taxes. A change in our effective tax rate can adversely impact our results from operations.
Compliance with federal securities laws, rules and regulations, as well as NASDAQ requirements, is becoming increasingly complex, and the significant attention and expense we must devote to those areas may have an adverse impact on our business.
Federal securities laws, rules and regulations, as well as NASDAQ rules and regulations, require companies to maintain extensive corporate governance measures, impose comprehensive reporting and disclosure requirements, set strict independence and financial expertise standards for audit and other committee members and impose civil and criminal penalties for companies and their chief executive officers, chief financial officers and directors for securities law violations. These laws, rules and regulations have increased, and in the future are expected to continue to increase, the scope, complexity and cost of our corporate governance, reporting and disclosure practices, which could harm our results of operations and divert management’s attention from business operations.
A change in accounting standards or practices or a change in existing taxation rules or practices (or changes in interpretations of such standards, practices or rules) can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even affect reporting of transactions completed before the change is effective.
New accounting pronouncements and taxation rules and varying interpretations of accounting pronouncements and taxation rules have occurred and will continue to occur in the future. Changes to (or revised interpretations or applications of) existing tax or accounting rules or the questioning of current or past practices may adversely affect our reported financial results or the way we conduct our business.
For example, the adoption of the authoritative guidance for stock-based compensation
,
which required us to measure all employee stock-based compensation awards using a fair value method beginning in fiscal year 2006 and record such expense in our consolidated financial statements, has had a material impact on our consolidated financial statements, as reported under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
26
|
ITEM 1B.
|
UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
|
None.
|
ITEM 2.
|
PROPERTIES
|
Information regarding our principal properties as of
June 30, 2011
is set forth below:
|
Location
|
Type
|
Principal Use
|
Square
Footage
|
Ownership
|
||||
|
Milpitas, CA
|
Office, plant and
warehouse
|
Principal Executive Offices, Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing, Service and Sales Administration
|
727,302
|
Owned
|
||||
|
Santa Clara, CA
|
Office, plant and
warehouse
|
Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing and Service
|
50,400
|
Leased
|
||||
|
Westwood, MA(1)
|
Office and plant
|
Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing and Service
|
116,908
|
Leased
|
||||
|
Leuven, Belgium(1)
|
Office, plant and
warehouse
|
Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing and Service and Sales Administration
|
99,315
|
Owned
|
||||
|
Shenzhen, China
|
Office and plant
|
Sales, Service and Manufacturing
|
33,571
|
Leased
|
||||
|
Weilburg, Germany
|
Office and plant
|
Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing, Service and Sales Administration
|
159,732
|
Leased
|
||||
|
Chennai, India(2)
|
Office
|
Engineering
|
79,668
|
Owned
|
||||
|
Migdal Ha’Emek, Israel
|
Office and plant
|
Research, Engineering, Marketing, Manufacturing, Service and Sales Administration
|
89,996
|
Owned
|
||||
|
Yokohama, Japan
|
Office and
warehouse
|
Sales, Service and Warehouse
|
37,418
|
Leased
|
||||
|
Serangoon, Singapore(3)
|
Office and plant
|
Manufacturing
|
185,809
|
Owned
|
||||
|
Hsinchu, Taiwan
|
Office
|
Sales and Service
|
73,676
|
Leased
|
||||
__________________
|
(1)
|
Portions of this property are sublet, are vacant and marketed to sublease, or are leased to third parties.
|
|
(2)
|
Portions of this property are being made available for sale.
|
|
(3)
|
We own the building at our location in Serangoon, Singapore, but the land on which this building resides is leased.
|
As of
June 30, 2011
, we owned or leased a total of approximately 1.9 million square feet of space worldwide, including the locations listed above and office space for smaller sales and service offices in several locations throughout the world. Our operating leases expire at various times through July 31, 2018 with renewal options at the fair market value for additional periods up to five years. Additional information regarding these leases is incorporated herein by reference from Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies” to the Consolidated Financial Statements. We believe our properties are adequately maintained and suitable for their intended use and that our production facilities have capacity adequate for our current needs, even after giving effect to the sale of certain properties as noted above.
27
|
ITEM 3.
|
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
|
Indemnification Obligations
As a result of our indemnification obligations in connection with the litigation and government inquiries related to our historical stock option practices, we are currently paying defense costs to one former officer and employee facing an SEC civil action to which we are not a party, and we are also obligated to pay the attorneys' fees and expenses incurred by former employees in connection with discovery undertaken in that case. We are further incurring costs associated with retaining counsel to respond to discovery requests and otherwise representing us in that litigation. Although the maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these arrangements is theoretically unlimited, we believe the fair value of this liability, to the extent estimable, is appropriately considered within the reserve we have established for currently pending legal proceedings.
Other Legal Matters
We are named from time to time as a party to lawsuits in the normal course of our business. Actions filed against us include commercial, intellectual property, customer, and labor and employment related claims, including complaints of alleged wrongful termination and potential class action lawsuits regarding alleged violations of federal and state wage and hour and other laws. Litigation, in general, and intellectual property and securities litigation in particular, can be expensive and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the results of legal proceedings are difficult to predict, and the costs incurred in litigation can be substantial, regardless of outcome. We believe the amounts reflected in our consolidated financial statements are adequate in light of the probable and estimated liabilities. However, because such matters are subject to many uncertainties, the ultimate outcomes are not predictable and there can be no assurances that the actual amounts required to satisfy alleged liabilities from the matters described above will not exceed the amounts reflected in our consolidated financial statements or will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
|
ITEM 4.
|
(Removed and Reserved)
|
28
PART II
|
ITEM 5.
|
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
Our common stock is listed and traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “KLAC.”
The prices per share reflected in the following table represent the high and low closing prices for our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the periods indicated:
|
|
Year ended June 30, 2011
|
Year ended June 30, 2010
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
High
|
Low
|
High
|
Low
|
|||||||||||
|
First Fiscal Quarter
|
$
|
35.23
|
|
$
|
27.16
|
|
$
|
35.86
|
|
$
|
25.13
|
|
|||
|
Second Fiscal Quarter
|
$
|
40.16
|
|
$
|
34.24
|
|
$
|
37.40
|
|
$
|
31.24
|
|
|||
|
Third Fiscal Quarter
|
$
|
51.21
|
|
$
|
37.69
|
|
$
|
37.12
|
|
$
|
28.09
|
|
|||
|
Fourth Fiscal Quarter
|
$
|
46.80
|
|
$
|
38.10
|
|
$
|
35.30
|
|
$
|
27.88
|
|
|||
We paid dividends to holders of our common stock during each of the quarters in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
. The total amount of dividends paid during the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
was
$167.4 million
and
$102.4 million
, respectively, reflecting an increase during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 to the level of our quarterly dividend from $0.15 to $0.25 per share. On
July 12, 2011
, we announced that our Board of Directors had authorized a further increase in the level of our quarterly dividend from $0.25 to $0.35 per share. Following such announcement, during the first quarter of the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
, our Board of Directors approved a quarterly cash dividend of
$0.35
per share, which was declared on
August 4, 2011
and will be paid on
September 1, 2011
to our stockholders of record on
August 15, 2011
.
As of
July 21, 2011
, there were
577
holders of record of our common stock.
Equity Repurchase Plans
The following is a summary of stock repurchases for each month during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
(1):
|
Period
|
Total Number of
Shares Purchased (2) |
Average Price Paid
per Share |
Maximum Number of
Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs (3) |
||||||
|
April 1, 2011 to April 30, 2011
|
432,523
|
|
$
|
43.72
|
|
9,957,126
|
|
||
|
May 1, 2011 to May 31, 2011
|
443,315
|
|
$
|
42.95
|
|
9,513,811
|
|
||
|
June 1, 2011 to June 30, 2011
|
497,497
|
|
$
|
40.01
|
|
9,016,314
|
|
||
|
Total
|
1,373,335
|
|
$
|
42.13
|
|
||||
__________________
|
(1)
|
In July 1997, our Board of Directors authorized us to systematically repurchase up to 17.8 million shares of our common stock in the open market. This plan was put into place to reduce the dilution from our employee benefit and
|
incentive plans, such as our equity incentive and employee stock purchase plans, and to return excess cash to our stockholders. Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase additional shares of our common stock under the repurchase program in February 2005 (up to 10.0 million shares), February 2007 (up to 10.0 million shares), August 2007 (up to 10.0 million shares), June 2008 (up to 15.0 million shares), and February 2011 (up to 10.0 million shares), in each case in addition to the originally authorized 17.8 million shares described in the first sentence of this footnote.
|
(2)
|
All shares were purchased pursuant to the publicly announced repurchase program described in footnote 1 above.
|
|
(3)
|
The stock repurchase program has no expiration date. Future repurchases of our common stock under our repurchase program may be effected through various different repurchase transaction structures, including isolated open market transactions or systematic repurchase plans.
|
29
Stock Performance Graph and Cumulative Total Return
The following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total return attained by stockholders on our common stock relative to the cumulative total returns of the S&P 500 Index (as required by SEC regulations) and the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (PHLX). The graph tracks the performance of a $100 investment in our common stock and in each of the indices (with the reinvestment of all dividends) from June 30, 2006 to
June 30, 2011
.
|
6/06
|
6/07
|
6/08
|
6/09
|
6/10
|
6/11
|
||||||
|
KLA-Tencor Corporation
|
100.00
|
133.51
|
100.14
|
63.88
|
71.89
|
107.11
|
|||||
|
S&P 500
|
100.00
|
120.59
|
104.77
|
77.30
|
88.46
|
115.61
|
|||||
|
PHLX Semiconductor
|
100.00
|
120.40
|
102.30
|
78.14
|
95.90
|
119.88
|
|||||
__________________
* Assumes $100 invested on June 30, 2006 in stock or index-including reinvestment of dividends.
Our fiscal year ends June 30. The comparisons in the graph above are based upon historical data and are not necessarily indicative of, nor intended to forecast, future stock price performance.
30
|
ITEM 6.
|
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
|
The following tables include selected consolidated summary financial data for each of our last five fiscal years. This data should be read in conjunction with Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” and Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
||||||||||||||
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Revenues
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
$
|
2,521,716
|
|
$
|
2,731,229
|
|
||||
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
$
|
1,160,330
|
|
$
|
314,166
|
|
$
|
(577,941
|
)
|
$
|
499,376
|
|
$
|
589,868
|
|
||||
|
Net income (loss)
|
$
|
794,488
|
|
$
|
212,300
|
|
$
|
(523,368
|
)
|
$
|
359,083
|
|
$
|
528,098
|
|
||||
|
Cash dividend declared per share
|
$
|
1.00
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
||||
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Basic
|
$
|
4.75
|
|
$
|
1.24
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
$
|
1.99
|
|
$
|
2.68
|
|
||||
|
Diluted
|
$
|
4.66
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
$
|
1.95
|
|
$
|
2.61
|
|
||||
|
As of June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
$
|
2,038,535
|
|
$
|
1,534,044
|
|
$
|
1,329,884
|
|
$
|
1,579,383
|
|
$
|
1,710,629
|
|
||||
|
Working capital
|
$
|
2,793,992
|
|
$
|
2,063,678
|
|
$
|
1,851,635
|
|
$
|
2,085,432
|
|
$
|
2,247,209
|
|
||||
|
Total assets
|
$
|
4,675,521
|
|
$
|
3,907,056
|
|
$
|
3,609,538
|
|
$
|
4,848,390
|
|
$
|
4,623,249
|
|
||||
|
Long-term debt(1)
|
$
|
746,290
|
|
$
|
745,747
|
|
$
|
745,204
|
|
$
|
744,661
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
||||
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
$
|
2,860,893
|
|
$
|
2,246,611
|
|
$
|
2,184,392
|
|
$
|
2,981,730
|
|
$
|
3,550,042
|
|
||||
__________________
|
(1)
|
In April 2008, we issued $750 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes due in 2018.
|
31
|
ITEM 7.
|
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the related notes included in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements, which involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including but not limited to those discussed in Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. (See “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”)
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES AND POLICIES
The preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions in applying our accounting policies that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. We base these estimates and assumptions on historical experience, and evaluate them on an on-going basis to ensure that they remain reasonable under current conditions. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We discuss the development and selection of the critical accounting estimates with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors on a quarterly basis, and the Audit Committee has reviewed our related disclosure in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The items in our financial statements requiring significant estimates and judgments are as follows:
Revenue Recognition.
We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, the selling price is fixed or determinable, and collectibility is reasonably assured. We derive revenue from three sources—sales of systems, spare parts and services. We typically recognize revenue for system sales upon acceptance by the customer that the system has been installed and is operating according to predetermined specifications. Under certain circumstances, however, we recognize revenue prior to acceptance from the customer, as follows:
|
•
|
When system sales to independent distributors have no installation requirement, contain no acceptance agreement, and 100% payment is due upon shipment, revenue is recognized upon shipment.
|
|
•
|
When the installation of the system is deemed perfunctory, revenue is recognized upon shipment. The portion of revenue associated with installation is deferred based on estimated fair value, and that revenue is recognized upon completion of the installation.
|
|
•
|
When the customer fab has previously accepted the same tool, with the same specifications, and it can be objectively demonstrated that the tool meets all of the required acceptance criteria upon shipment, revenue is recognized upon shipment. The portion of revenue associated with installation is deferred based on estimated fair value, and that revenue is recognized upon completion of the installation.
|
|
•
|
When the customer withholds acceptance due to issues unrelated to product performance, revenue is recognized when the system is performing as intended and meets all published and contractually agreed specifications.
|
|
•
|
When the system is damaged during transit and title has passed to the customer, revenue is recognized upon receipt of cash payment from the customer.
|
We enter into sales arrangements that may consist of multiple deliverables of our products and services where certain elements of the sales arrangement are not delivered and accepted in one reporting period. Judgment is required to properly identify the accounting units of the multiple deliverable transactions and to determine the manner in which revenue should be allocated among the accounting units. Additionally, judgment is required to interpret various commercial terms and determine when all criteria of revenue recognition have been met in order for revenue recognition to occur in the appropriate accounting period. While changes in the allocation of the estimated sales price between the accounting units will not affect the amount of total revenue recognized for a particular arrangement, any material changes in these allocations could impact the timing of revenue recognition, which could have a material effect on our financial position and results of operations.
Trade-in rights are occasionally granted to customers to trade in tools in connection with subsequent purchases. We estimate the value of the trade-in right and reduce the revenue of the initial sale. This amount is recognized at the earlier of the exercise of the trade-in right or the expiration of the trade-in right.
Spare parts revenue is recognized when the product has been shipped, risk of loss has passed to the customer and collection of the resulting receivable is probable.
32
Service and maintenance contract revenue is recognized ratably over the term of the maintenance contract. If maintenance is included in an arrangement that includes a software license agreement, amounts related to maintenance are allocated based on fair value. Services performed in the absence of a contract, such as consulting and training revenue, are recognized when the related services are performed and collectibility is reasonably assured.
The deferred system profit balance equals the amount of deferred system revenue that was invoiced and due on shipment, less applicable product and warranty costs. Deferred system revenue represents the value of products that have been shipped and billed to customers which has not met our revenue recognition criteria. Deferred system profit does not include the profit associated with product shipments to customers in Japan, to whom title does not transfer until customer acceptance. Shipments to customers in Japan are classified as inventory at cost until the time of acceptance.
We also defer the fair value of non-standard warranty bundled with equipment sales as unearned revenue. Non-standard warranty includes services incremental to the standard 40-hour per week coverage for twelve months. Non-standard warranty is recognized ratably as revenue when the applicable warranty term period commences.
Inventories.
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (on a first-in, first-out basis) or market. Demonstration units are stated at their manufacturing cost and written down to their net realizable value. Our manufacturing overhead standards for product costs are calculated assuming full absorption of forecasted spending over projected volumes, adjusted for excess capacity. Abnormal inventory costs such as costs of idle facilities, excess freight and handling costs, and spoilage are recognized as current period charges. We write down product inventory based on forecasted demand and technological obsolescence and parts inventory based on forecasted usage. These factors are impacted by market and economic conditions, technology changes, new product introductions and changes in strategic direction and require estimates that may include uncertain elements. Actual demand may differ from forecasted demand, and such differences may have a material effect on recorded inventory values.
Warranty.
We provide standard warranty coverage on our systems for 40 hours per week for twelve months, providing labor and parts necessary to repair the systems during the warranty period. We account for the estimated warranty cost as a charge to costs of revenues when revenue is recognized. The estimated warranty cost is based on historical product performance and field expenses. Utilizing actual service records, we calculate the average service hours and parts expense per system and apply the actual labor and overhead rates to determine the estimated warranty charge. We update these estimated charges on a quarterly basis. The actual product performance and/or field expense profiles may differ, and in those cases we adjust our warranty accruals accordingly. See Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies” to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a detailed description.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts.
A majority of our trade receivables are derived from sales to large multinational semiconductor manufacturers throughout the world. In order to monitor potential credit losses, we perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition. An allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained for probable credit losses based upon our assessment of the expected collectibility of the accounts receivable. The allowance for doubtful accounts is reviewed on a quarterly basis to assess the adequacy of the allowance. We take into consideration (1) any circumstances of which we are aware of a customer’s inability to meet its financial obligations; and (2) our judgments as to prevailing economic conditions in the industry and their impact on our customers. If circumstances change, such that the financial conditions of our customers are adversely affected and they are unable to meet their financial obligations to us, we may need to take additional allowances, which would result in a reduction of our net income.
Stock-Based Compensation.
We account for stock-based awards exchanged for employee services based on the fair value of those awards. The fair value of stock-based awards is measured at the grant date and is recognized as expense over the employee’s requisite service period. The fair value is determined using a Black-Scholes valuation model for purchase rights under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan and using the closing price of our common stock on the grant date for restricted stock units. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the input of assumptions, including the option’s expected life and the expected price volatility of the underlying stock. The expected stock price volatility assumption is based on the market-based implied volatility from traded options of our common stock.
Contingencies and Litigation.
We are subject to the possibility of losses from various contingencies. Considerable judgment is necessary to estimate the probability and amount of any loss from such contingencies. An accrual is made when it is probable that a liability has been incurred or an asset has been impaired and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We accrue a liability and recognize as expense the estimated costs expected to be incurred over the next twelve months to defend or settle asserted and unasserted claims existing as of the balance sheet date. See Item 3, “Legal Proceedings” and Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies” to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a detailed description.
33
Goodwill and Intangible Assets.
We assess goodwill for impairment annually as well as whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. Long-lived intangible assets are tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. See Note 6, “Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets” to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a detailed description. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in each business combination. We conducted our annual evaluation of goodwill by reporting unit during the three months ended December 31,
2010
and concluded that there was no impairment. There have been no significant events or circumstances affecting the valuation of goodwill subsequent to the impairment test performed in the three months ended December 31,
2010
. The next annual evaluation of the goodwill by reporting unit will be performed in the three months ending December 31,
2011
.
Income Taxes.
We account for income taxes in accordance with the authoritative guidance, which requires that deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using enacted tax rates for the effect of temporary differences between the book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities. The guidance also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that a portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. We have determined that a valuation allowance was necessary against a portion of the deferred tax assets, but our future taxable income will be sufficient to recover the remainder of our deferred tax assets. However, should there be a change in our ability to recover our deferred tax assets, we could be required to record a valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets. This would result in an increase to our tax provision in the period in which we determined that the recovery was not probable.
On a quarterly basis, we provide for income taxes based upon an estimated annual effective income tax rate. The effective tax rate is highly dependent upon the geographic composition of worldwide earnings, tax regulations governing each region, availability of tax credits and the effectiveness of our tax planning strategies. We carefully monitor the changes in many factors and adjust our effective income tax rate on a timely basis. If actual results differ from these estimates, this could have a material effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, the calculation of our tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax regulations. In accordance with the authoritative guidance on accounting for uncertainty in income taxes, we recognize liabilities for uncertain tax positions based on the two-step process prescribed within the interpretation. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained in audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We reevaluate these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis. This evaluation is based on factors including, but not limited to, changes in facts or circumstances, changes in tax law, effectively settled issues under audit and new audit activity. Any change in these factors could result in the recognition of a tax benefit or an additional charge to the tax provision.
Valuation of Marketable Securities.
Our investments in available-for-sale securities are reported at fair value. Unrealized gains related to increases in the fair value of investments and unrealized losses related to decreases in the fair value are included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax, as reported on our Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity. However, changes in the fair value of investments impact our net income only when such investments are sold or impairment is recognized. Realized gains and losses on the sale of securities are determined by specific identification of the security’s cost basis. We periodically review our investment portfolio to determine if any investment is other-than-temporarily impaired due to changes in credit risk or other potential valuation concerns, which would require us to record an impairment charge in the period any such determination is made. In making this judgment, we evaluate, among other things, the duration of the investment, the extent to which the fair value of an investment is less than its cost, the credit rating and any changes in credit rating for the investment, default and loss rates of the underlying collateral, structure and credit enhancements to determine if a credit loss may exist. Our assessment that an investment is not other-than-temporarily impaired could change in the future due to new developments or changes in our strategies or assumptions related to any particular investment.
34
Effects of Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2011, the FASB amended its guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income. Under the amended guidance, an entity has the option to present comprehensive income in either one continuous statement or two consecutive financial statements. A single statement must present the components of net income and total net income, the components of other comprehensive income and total other comprehensive income, and a total for comprehensive income. In a two-statement approach, an entity must present the components of net income and total net income in the first statement. That statement must be immediately followed by a financial statement that presents the components of other comprehensive income, a total for other comprehensive income, and a total for comprehensive income. The option under current guidance that permits the presentation of components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity has been eliminated. The amendment becomes effective retrospectively for our interim period ending March 31, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect that this guidance will have an impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature.
In May 2011, the FASB amended its guidance,
to converge fair value measurement and disclosure guidance about fair value measurement under U.S. GAAP with International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"). IFRS is a comprehensive series of accounting standards published by the International Accounting Standards Board
.
The amendment changes the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For many of the requirements, the FASB does not intend for the amendment to result in a change in the application of the requirements in the current authoritative guidance. The amendment becomes effective prospectively for our interim period ending March 31, 2012. Early application is not permitted. We do not expect the amendment to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on goodwill and other intangible assets. The amendment modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if there are qualitative factors indicating that it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance which requires goodwill of a reporting unit to be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. This amendment was effective for our interim period ended March 31, 2011. The amendment did not have an impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on business combinations. Under the amended guidance, a public entity that presents comparative financial statements must disclose the revenues and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the prior annual reporting period. The amendment was effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date was on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is permitted. The amendment did not have an impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In April 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on share-based payment awards denominated in certain currencies. The amendment clarifies that an employee share-based payment award with an exercise price denominated in the currency of a market in which a substantial portion of the entity’s equity securities trades should not be considered to contain a condition that is not a market, performance or service condition. Therefore, an entity would not classify such an award as a liability if it otherwise qualifies as equity. This amendment becomes effective for our interim period ending September 30, 2011. We do not expect the implementation to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In January 2010, the FASB issued authoritative guidance for fair value measurements. This guidance now requires a reporting entity to disclose separately the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and also to describe the reasons for these transfers. This authoritative guidance also requires enhanced disclosure of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements. The guidance for Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements was effective for our interim reporting period ended March 31, 2010. The implementation did not have an impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature. The guidance for Level 3 fair value measurements disclosures becomes effective for our interim reporting period ending September 30, 2011, and we do not expect that this guidance will have an impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
KLA-Tencor Corporation is a leading supplier of process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries. Our broad portfolio of products and services primarily supports integrated circuit (“IC” or “chip”) manufacturers throughout the semiconductor fabrication process, from research and development to final volume production. We provide leading-edge equipment, software and support that enable IC manufacturers to identify, resolve and
35
manage significant advanced technology manufacturing process challenges and obtain higher finished product yields at lower overall cost. In addition to serving the semiconductor industry, we also provide a range of technology solutions to a number of other high technology industries, including the light emitting diode (“LED”), data storage and photovoltaic industries, as well as general materials research.
Our products and services are used by the vast majority of bare wafer, IC, lithography reticle ("reticle" or "mask") and disk manufacturers in the world. Our equipment, services and expertise are used by our customers to measure and control nanometric-level manufacturing processes, and to detect, analyze and resolve critical product defects that arise in that environment. Our revenues are driven largely by our customers' spending on capital equipment and related maintenance services necessary to support key transitions in their underlying product technologies, or to increase their production volumes in response to market demand. Our semiconductor customers generally operate in one or more of the three major semiconductor markets -- memory, foundry and logic. All three of these markets are characterized by rapid technological changes and sudden shifts in end-user demand, which influences the level and pattern of our customers' spending on our products and services. Although capital spending in all three semiconductor markets has been historically very cyclical, the demand for more advanced and lower cost chips used in a growing number of consumer electronics, communications, data processing, and industrial products has resulted in favorable long-term revenue growth rates for our process control and yield management solutions. We believe that, over the long term, our customers will continue to invest in advanced technologies and new materials to enable smaller design rules and higher density applications, as well as to reduce cost. We expect that this in turn will drive long-term increased adoption of process control equipment and services that reduce semiconductor defectivity and improve manufacturing yields.
As a supplier to the global semiconductor and semiconductor-related industries, we are subject to the cyclical capital spending that characterizes these industries. The timing, length and volatility of a capacity oriented capital spending cycle of our customers are unpredictable. In addition, our customer base continues to become more highly concentrated over time, thereby increasing the potential impact of a sudden change in capital spending by a major customer on our revenues and profitability. Nonetheless, we believe that over the long-term our customers will continue to increase their total spending on process control and yield management solutions, in response to the challenges posed by shrinking device sizes, the transition to new production materials, new device and circuit architecture, more demanding lithography processes, the transition from 300 millimeter to 450 millimeter wafers, and new back-end packaging techniques.
The growing use of increasingly sophisticated semiconductor devices in communications, consumer electronics, data processing, and automotive and aerospace products, combined with a somewhat improved economic environment during the fiscal year ended June 30,
2011
, particularly in Asia, caused many of our customers to invest in additional semiconductor manufacturing capabilities and capacity. These investments included process control and yield management equipment and services, which had a significant favorable impact on our revenues, compared to the prior fiscal year. The resulting increase in revenues allowed us to leverage our infrastructure and improve manufacturing capacity utilization, driving an improvement in gross margin as a percentage of revenue, again as compared to the previous year.
In recent weeks, however, there have been indications that the industry demand environment may be slowing in the near-term, as some of our customers appear to be reassessing their capacity expansion plans and timelines. Nevertheless, we believe that our customers remain committed to their roadmaps toward shrinking device sizes and other technological advancements as a means for driving future competitive differentiation and to lower costs, leaving the longer term drivers underlying growth in our industry intact.
The following table sets forth some of our key consolidated financial information for each of our last three fiscal years:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
||
|
Costs of revenues
|
$
|
1,259,243
|
|
$
|
815,662
|
|
$
|
864,824
|
|
||
|
Gross margin percentage
|
60
|
%
|
55
|
%
|
43
|
%
|
|||||
|
Net income (loss)
|
$
|
794,488
|
|
$
|
212,300
|
|
$
|
(523,368
|
)
|
||
|
Diluted income (loss) per share
|
$
|
4.66
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
||
The results for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 reflected improved fundamentals in the semiconductor industry driven by reduced uncertainty over the global economic environment and continued economic growth in much of Asia. As we increased our business activity levels and shipped more products to our customers during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, we continued to maintain cost discipline, which resulted in improved gross margins as well as net income.
36
The results for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 were adversely impacted by the weak demand for semiconductor capital equipment and service due to the unfavorable global economic and industry conditions. The macroeconomic uncertainty led our customers to significantly reduce their factory operations and spending. While we took actions to restructure our operations and reduce our cost structure in response to the deteriorating market conditions, the rapid decline in revenues resulted in a significant deterioration in gross margins and a net loss. Our financial results for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 also included significant charges associated with impairment of goodwill, purchased intangible assets and other long-lived assets, as well as restructuring programs. In the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, we completed the acquisition of the Microelectronic Inspection Equipment business unit (“MIE business unit”) of Vistec Semiconductor Systems for net cash consideration of $141.4 million. The acquired MIE business unit is a provider of mask registration measurement tools, Scanning Electron Microscope (“SEM”) based tools for mask critical dimension measurement and macro defect inspection systems.
Revenues and Gross Margin
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
FY11 vs. FY10
|
FY10 vs. FY09
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Revenues:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Product
|
$
|
2,613,438
|
|
$
|
1,324,270
|
|
$
|
1,062,126
|
|
$
|
1,289,168
|
|
97
|
%
|
$
|
262,144
|
|
25
|
%
|
||||||
|
Service
|
561,729
|
|
496,490
|
|
458,090
|
|
65,239
|
|
13
|
%
|
38,400
|
|
8
|
%
|
|||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
$
|
1,354,407
|
|
$
|
300,544
|
|
||||||||||
|
Costs of revenues
|
$
|
1,259,243
|
|
$
|
815,662
|
|
$
|
864,824
|
|
$
|
443,581
|
|
54
|
%
|
$
|
(49,162
|
)
|
(6
|
)%
|
||||||
|
Gross margin percentage
|
60
|
%
|
55
|
%
|
43
|
%
|
5
|
%
|
12
|
%
|
|||||||||||||||
Product revenues
Product revenues increased in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
primarily as a result of increased shipment and acceptance of our products within the year. Many of our customers continued to maintain high levels of capital spending for advanced technology development as well as capacity related investments, resulting in an increase in the number of tools that we sold and revenues that we recognized across each of the three major semiconductor markets (memory, foundry and logic), compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
. Our revenues have continued to grow each quarter over the past two years, as we continued to increase production, ship products and provide services to our customers to meet their process control and yield management requirements. An increase in the sales of both our defect inspection and metrology equipment contributed to the increase in the number of tools that we sold during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
Product revenues increased in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
as a result of increased capital spending by customers for both technology and capacity related investments of process control equipment, in response to strong semiconductor electronics end market demand. New semiconductor manufacturing products targeted towards advanced production nodes were significant contributors to this increase in revenue as customers, particularly those serving the foundry market, added production capacity. These factors contributed to an increase in the number of tools that we sold during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
, compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
. The increase in tool sales over fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
was primarily driven by an increase in our sales of defect inspection equipment.
For the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, the following customers each accounted for more than 10% of total revenues:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
||
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
||
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
—
|
—
|
||
37
Service revenues
Service revenues are generated from maintenance contracts, as well as billable time and material service calls made to our customers after the expiration of the warranty period. The amount of service revenues generated is generally a function of the number of post-warranty systems installed at our customers’ sites and the utilization of those systems. Service revenues continued to steadily increase during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
compared to the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2010
and
2009
as a result of an increase in the number of post-warranty systems installed at our customers' sites as well as higher factory utilization by our customers.
Revenues by region
Revenues by region for the periods indicated were as follows:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
United States
|
$
|
610,955
|
|
19
|
%
|
$
|
341,079
|
|
19
|
%
|
$
|
372,887
|
|
24
|
%
|
|||||
|
Taiwan
|
864,378
|
|
27
|
%
|
688,089
|
|
38
|
%
|
181,411
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Japan
|
413,208
|
|
13
|
%
|
239,393
|
|
13
|
%
|
437,081
|
|
29
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Europe & Israel
|
340,249
|
|
11
|
%
|
111,497
|
|
6
|
%
|
162,665
|
|
11
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Korea
|
480,488
|
|
15
|
%
|
151,198
|
|
8
|
%
|
187,624
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Rest of Asia
|
465,889
|
|
15
|
%
|
289,504
|
|
16
|
%
|
178,548
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
100
|
%
|
|||||
A significant portion of our revenues continue to be generated in Asia, where a substantial portion of the world’s semiconductor manufacturing capacity is located, and we expect that trend to continue.
Gross margin
Our gross margin fluctuates with revenue levels and product mix and is affected by variations in costs related to manufacturing and servicing our products, including our ability to scale our operations efficiently and effectively in response to prevailing business conditions. Over the past several years, we have embarked on various advanced product development, customer satisfaction improvement and globalization initiatives to improve our competitiveness and gross margins. Over the past eight quarters, our gross margin has generally benefited from the operating efficiencies associated with increasing revenues over that period.
The following tables summarize the major factors that contributed to the changes in gross margin percentage:
|
Gross Margin Percentage
|
||
|
June 30, 2009
|
43.1
|
%
|
|
Revenue volume of products and service
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
Mix of products and services sold
|
(1.5
|
)%
|
|
Manufacturing labor, overhead and efficiencies
|
4.1
|
%
|
|
Other service and manufacturing costs
|
7.1
|
%
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
55.2
|
%
|
|
Revenue volume of products and service
|
3.9
|
%
|
|
Mix of products and services sold
|
(0.1
|
)%
|
|
Manufacturing labor, overhead and efficiencies
|
1.6
|
%
|
|
Other service and manufacturing costs
|
(0.3
|
)%
|
|
June 30, 2011
|
60.3
|
%
|
Changes in gross margin percentage driven by revenue volume reflect our ability to leverage existing infrastructure to generate higher revenues. It also includes the effect of fluctuations in foreign exchange rates and average customer pricing. Changes in gross margin percentage from mix of products and services sold reflect the impact of changes in the composition within product and service offerings. Changes in gross margin percentage from manufacturing labor, overhead and efficiencies reflect our ability to manage costs and drive productivity as we scale our manufacturing activity to respond to customer requirements; this includes the impact of capacity utilization, use of overtime and variability of cost structure. Changes in gross
38
margin percentage from other service and manufacturing costs include the impact of customer support costs, including the efficiencies with which we deliver services to our customers, and the effectiveness with which we manage our production plans and inventory risk.
Our gross margin increased to
60.3%
during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
from
55.2%
during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
primarily due to increased demand and revenue from the sale of advanced technology defect inspection and metrology products.
Our gross margin percentage increased to
55.2%
during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
from
43.1%
during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
primarily due to demand for new high value products, significant volume efficiencies in manufacturing operations worldwide, lower inventory obsolescence, as well as a lower overall manufacturing cost structure as a result of our outsourcing and globalization initiatives. In addition, productivity improvements resulting from better utilization of field service resources contributed to the gross margin improvement.
Engineering, Research and Development (“R&D”)
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
FY11 vs. FY10
|
FY10 vs. FY09
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
R&D expenses
|
$
|
386,163
|
|
$
|
329,560
|
|
$
|
371,463
|
|
$
|
56,603
|
|
17
|
%
|
$
|
(41,903
|
)
|
(11
|
)%
|
||||||
|
R&D expenses as a percentage of total revenues
|
12
|
%
|
18
|
%
|
24
|
%
|
(6
|
)%
|
(6
|
)%
|
|||||||||||||||
R&D expenses during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
increased compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
, primarily due to an increase in engineering material costs of $24.2 million for program development related to our next-generation defect inspection products, an increase in employee-related expenses of $27.8 million as a result of additional engineering headcount and higher variable compensation, and an increase in external services of $9.7 million to support expanded R&D activities, partially offset by an increase of $5.1 million in benefit to R&D expense from external funding.
R&D expenses during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
decreased compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
, even as we made significant investments in product research and development. The decrease during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
was primarily attributable to cost reduction activities initiated during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
, the benefits of which were fully realized in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
, partially offset by higher variable compensation. In addition, development material costs and consulting services related to R&D product development decreased compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
as certain significant new products completed the product development cycle during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 and came to market in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
. The decrease in R&D expenses primarily consisted of a decrease in employee-related expenses of $11.2 million; a decrease in engineering material costs of $14.1 million; a decrease in external services of $5.1 million; and a decrease in depreciation of fixed assets, amortization of intangibles and expensed in-process R&D (“IPR&D”) of $15.5 million; offset by a decrease in benefit to R&D expense from external funding of $8.0 million.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, we expensed IPR&D of $8.6 million upon the completion of the acquisitions during the applicable fiscal year in connection with acquired intellectual property for which, as of the acquisition date, technological feasibility had not been established and no future alternative uses existed. The fair value of the purchased IPR&D was determined using the income approach, which discounts expected future cash flows from projects to their net present value. Future cash flows were estimated, taking into account the expected life cycles of the products and the underlying technology, relevant market sizes and industry trends. We determined a discount rate for each project based on the relative risks inherent in the project’s development horizon, the estimated costs of development, and the level of technological change in the project and the industry, among other factors. IPR&D was expensed upon acquisition because technological feasibility had not been achieved and no future alternative uses existed. The development of these technologies remains a risk due to the remaining efforts to achieve technological feasibility, rapidly changing customer markets, uncertain standards for new products, and significant competitive threats. The nature of the efforts to develop these technologies into commercially viable products consists primarily of planning, designing, experimenting and testing activities necessary to determine that the technologies can meet market expectations, including functionality and technical requirements.
R&D expenses include the benefit of
$18.8 million
,
$13.7 million
and
$21.7 million
of external funding received during the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively, for certain strategic development programs primarily from government grants. We expect our R&D expenses to increase with increases in our business activity levels as we accelerate our investments in critical programs focusing on new technologies and enhancements to existing products.
39
Our future operating results will depend significantly on our ability to produce products and provide services that have a competitive advantage in our marketplace. To do this, we believe that we must continue to make substantial investments in our research and development. We remain committed to product development in new and emerging technologies as we address the yield challenges our customers face at future technology nodes.
Selling, General and Administrative (“SG&A”)
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
FY11 vs. FY10
|
FY10 vs. FY09
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
SG&A expenses
|
$
|
369,431
|
|
$
|
361,372
|
|
$
|
415,126
|
|
$
|
8,059
|
|
2
|
%
|
$
|
(53,754
|
)
|
(13
|
)%
|
||||||
|
SG&A expenses as a percentage of total revenues
|
12
|
%
|
20
|
%
|
27
|
%
|
(8
|
)%
|
(7
|
)%
|
|||||||||||||||
SG&A expenses during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
were higher compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
primarily due to increases in employee-related expenses of $37.0 million as a result of additional headcount to support higher sales volume and higher variable compensation, partially offset by a decrease in asset impairment charges of $13.4 million, a decrease in legal expenses of $9.1 million related to our historical stock option practices and certain indemnification obligations, and an increase in bad debt recovery of $6.7 million.
SG&A expenses during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
were lower compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
primarily due to cost reduction activities initiated during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
, the benefits of which were fully realized in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
, partially offset by higher variable compensation. The decrease in SG&A expenses primarily consisted of a decrease in employee-related expenses of $21.3 million and a decrease in depreciation of fixed assets and amortization of intangibles of $10.5 million, partially offset by an increase in legal expenses for stockholder litigation relating to our historical stock option practices of $3.0 million. In addition, $2.9 million of bad debt recovery was recorded in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
, compared to $23.2 million of bad debt expense recorded in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
.
Interest Income and Other, Net
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Interest income and other, net
|
$
|
4,064
|
|
$
|
31,532
|
|
$
|
30,749
|
|
||
|
Interest expense
|
$
|
54,328
|
|
$
|
54,517
|
|
$
|
55,339
|
|
||
|
Interest income and other, net as a percentage of total revenues
|
0
|
%
|
2
|
%
|
2
|
%
|
|||||
|
Interest expense as a percentage of total revenues
|
2
|
%
|
3
|
%
|
4
|
%
|
|||||
Interest income and other, net is comprised primarily of interest income earned on our investment and cash portfolio, realized gains or losses on sales of marketable securities, gains or losses from revaluation of certain foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities as well as foreign currency contracts, and impairments associated with equity investments in privately-held companies. The decrease in interest income and other, net during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
was primarily attributable to impairment charges of
$9.9 million
recorded during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
for equity investments in privately-held companies and partially offset by an international tax reserve benefit of
$15.9 million
due to the expiration of a statute of limitations relating to an uncertainty in our position with respect to a foreign transaction-based tax during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
. Interest income and other, net during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
remained flat.
Interest expense is primarily attributable to the
$750 million
aggregate principal amount of senior fixed rate notes that we issued in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008.
40
Provision for Income Taxes
The following table provides details of income taxes:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
$
|
1,110,066
|
|
$
|
291,181
|
|
$
|
(602,531
|
)
|
||
|
Provision for (benefit from) taxes
|
315,578
|
|
78,881
|
|
(79,163
|
)
|
|||||
|
Effective tax rate
|
28.4
|
%
|
27.1
|
%
|
13.1
|
%
|
|||||
The provision for income taxes differs from the statutory U.S. federal rate primarily due to foreign income with lower tax rates and tax credits, offset by state taxes, the tax effects of employee stock activity and other factors.
Tax expense as a percentage of income during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
was
28.4%
compared to
27.1%
for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
. Tax expense increased primarily from an increase in state tax expense, a decrease in the benefit from lower income earned outside the U.S. with lower tax rates, and an increase in tax reserves, offset by a decrease in the effect of shortfalls from employee stock activity.
Tax expense as a percentage of income during the year ended
June 30, 2010
was
27.1%
compared to a benefit of 13.1% as a percentage of a loss in the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
. The difference in the percentages was primarily due to a decrease in the benefit on the loss incurred in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 from a goodwill impairment charge of $277.0 million related to certain business units, which was non-deductible for tax purposes, and $38.1 million in additional tax expense due to a reduction in non-current deferred tax assets. The reduction in the deferred tax asset was a result of the adoption of California budget legislation, signed on February 20, 2009, which will allow a taxpayer to elect an alternative method to attribute taxable income to California for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2011. We expect to make the election to use the alternative method to attribute taxable income to California for our fiscal year ending June 30, 2012. In addition, there was less income earned outside the U.S. subject to lower tax rates in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
Our future effective income tax rate depends on various factors, such as tax legislation, the geographic composition of our pre-tax income, non-deductible expenses incurred in connection with acquisitions, research and development credits as a percentage of aggregate pre-tax income, the domestic manufacturing deduction, non-taxable or non-deductible increases or decreases in the assets held within our Executive Deferred Savings Plan, the tax effects of employee stock activity and the effectiveness of our tax planning strategies.
We incurred $15.2 million and $12.0 million in additional tax expense during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, due to shortfalls from employee stock activity. Windfall tax benefits arise when a company's tax deduction for employee stock activity exceeds book compensation for the same activity. A shortfall arises when the tax deduction is less than book compensation. Windfalls are recorded as increases to capital in excess of par value. Shortfalls are recorded as decreases to capital in excess of par value to the extent that cumulative windfalls exceed cumulative shortfalls. Shortfalls in excess of cumulative windfalls are recorded as provision for income taxes.
For the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
, cumulative shortfalls from employee stock activity may continue to exceed cumulative windfalls from employee stock activity, and we may therefore report higher provision for income taxes as a result. Because we cannot determine all of the factors that will enter into our income tax expense computation for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
, we cannot currently estimate this impact on our tax rate for the next fiscal year.
In the normal course of business, we are subject to tax audits in various jurisdictions, and such jurisdictions may assess additional income or other taxes against us. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, the final determination of tax audits and any related litigation could be materially different from our historical income tax provisions and accruals. The results of an audit or litigation could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or cash flows in the period or periods for which that determination is made.
41
Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
711,329
|
|
$
|
529,918
|
|
$
|
524,967
|
|
||
|
Marketable securities
|
1,327,206
|
|
1,004,126
|
|
804,917
|
|
|||||
|
Total cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities
|
$
|
2,038,535
|
|
$
|
1,534,044
|
|
0
|
$
|
1,329,884
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total assets
|
44
|
%
|
39
|
%
|
37
|
%
|
|||||
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
$
|
823,166
|
|
$
|
447,800
|
|
$
|
195,684
|
|
||
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
(359,510
|
)
|
(227,964
|
)
|
(484,900
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
(300,155
|
)
|
(216,331
|
)
|
(299,117
|
)
|
|||||
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
17,910
|
|
1,446
|
|
(14,806
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
181,411
|
|
$
|
4,951
|
|
$
|
(603,139
|
)
|
||
As of
June 30, 2011
, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities totaled
$2 billion
, which is an increase of
$504 million
from
June 30, 2010
. As of
June 30, 2011
, $678 million of the
$2 billion
of cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities were held by our foreign subsidiaries and branch offices. We currently intend to permanently reinvest approximately $421 million of the cash held by our foreign subsidiaries. If, however, a portion of these funds were to be needed for our operations in the United States, we would be required to accrue and pay U.S. and foreign taxes of approximately 30%-50% of the funds repatriated. The amount of taxes due will depend on the amount and manner of the repatriation, as well as the location from where the funds are repatriated. We have accrued (but have not paid) U.S. taxes on the remaining cash of $257 million of the $678 million held by our foreign subsidiaries and branch offices. As such, these funds can be returned to the U.S. without accruing any additional U.S. tax expense.
The total amount of dividends paid during the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
was
$167 million
,
$102 million
and
$102 million
, respectively. The increase in the total amount of dividends paid during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the preceding fiscal years reflects an increase during the quarter ended September 30, 2010 to the level of our quarterly dividend from
$0.15
to
$0.25
per share. On July 12, 2011, we announced that our Board of Directors had authorized a further increase in the level of our quarterly dividend from
$0.25
to
$0.35
per share.
The shares repurchased under our stock repurchase program have decreased our basic and diluted weighted-average shares outstanding. The decrease was partially offset by additional shares issued upon the exercise of employee stock options and the vesting of employee restricted stock units and in connection with stock purchases under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan. In October 2008, we suspended our stock repurchase program, and we subsequently restarted the program in February 2010.
We have historically financed our liquidity requirements through cash generated from operations.
Fiscal Year 2011 Compared to Fiscal Year 2010
Cash provided by operating activities during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
increased compared to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2010
from
$448 million
to
$823 million
primarily as a result of the following key factors:
|
•
|
An increase in cash collections of approximately $1.4 billion during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, due to higher sales volume, partially offset by
|
|
•
|
An increase in vendor payments of approximately $580 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, to support a higher level of business activities,
|
|
•
|
An increase in payroll expenses of approximately $170 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, mainly due to bonus payments for fiscal year 2010 (which were paid during fiscal year 2010 and higher headcount), and
|
|
•
|
An increase in tax payments of approximately $270 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, due to higher profitability.
|
42
Cash used in investing activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 increased compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 from
$228 million
to
$360 million
primarily as a result of an increase in the use of cash for purchases of available-for-sale and trading securities, net of sales and maturities, of approximately $124 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
Cash used in financing activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 increased compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 from
$216 million
to
$300 million
as a result of the following key factors:
|
•
|
An increase in dividend payments of $65 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, mainly due to an increase in the quarterly dividend payout amount which was announced in July 2010, and
|
|
•
|
An increase in common stock repurchases of $99 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, mainly due to the temporary suspension of our stock repurchase program from October 2008 to February 2010 due to market conditions, partially offset by
|
|
•
|
An increase in proceeds from the exercise of stock options of $89 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
|
Fiscal Year 2010 Compared to Fiscal Year 2009
Cash provided by operating activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 increased compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 from $196 million to $448 million primarily as a result of the following key factors:
|
•
|
Lower operating expenses during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, reduced by approximately $165 million compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, resulting primarily from our cost cutting measures initiated during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, the benefits of which were fully realized in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010,
|
|
•
|
No material cash payments in the settlement of litigation during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, compared to a cash payment of $65 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 in connection with the settlement of the stockholder class action litigation related to our historical stock option practices, and
|
|
•
|
An increase in customer collections of approximately $58 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, partially offset by
|
|
•
|
An increase in taxes paid of approximately $26 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
|
Cash used in investing activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 declined compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 from $485 million to $228 million primarily as a result of the following key factors:
|
•
|
A decrease of $140 million in acquisitions, primarily driven by the acquisition of the MIE business unit during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, and
|
|
•
|
A decrease in the use of cash for purchases of available-for-sale and trading securities, net of sales and maturities, of approximately $141 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, partially offset by
|
|
•
|
A decrease in cash collections by approximately $16 million during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 from sale of assets, compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
|
Cash used in financing activities during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010 declined compared to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 from $299 million to $216 million as a result of lower common stock repurchases. We repurchased $136 million of our common stock during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, compared to $227 million in stock repurchases during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009.
43
Contractual Obligations
The following is a schedule summarizing our significant obligations to make future payments under contractual obligations as of
June 30, 2011
:
|
|
Fiscal year ending June 30,
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
2012
|
2013
|
2014
|
2015
|
2016
|
Thereafter
|
Other
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Long-term debt obligations(1)
|
$
|
750,000
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
750,000
|
|
—
|
|
||||||||
|
Interest expense associated with long-term debt obligations
|
353,625
|
|
51,750
|
|
51,750
|
|
51,750
|
|
51,750
|
|
51,750
|
|
94,875
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Purchase commitments
|
352,404
|
|
340,730
|
|
8,136
|
|
3,390
|
|
130
|
|
18
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Non-current income tax payable(2)
|
85,537
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
85,537
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Operating leases
|
24,987
|
|
7,992
|
|
6,001
|
|
3,889
|
|
2,106
|
|
1,869
|
|
3,130
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Pension obligations
|
27,556
|
|
2,001
|
|
1,240
|
|
2,185
|
|
2,927
|
|
2,466
|
|
16,737
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Total contractual cash obligations
|
$
|
1,594,109
|
|
$
|
402,473
|
|
$
|
67,127
|
|
$
|
61,214
|
|
$
|
56,913
|
|
$
|
56,103
|
|
$
|
864,742
|
|
$
|
85,537
|
|
|||||||
__________________
|
(1)
|
In April 2008, we issued $750 million aggregate principal amount of senior notes due in 2018.
|
|
(2)
|
Represents the non-current income tax payable obligation and related accrued interest. We are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the timing of payments in individual years beyond 12 months due to uncertainties in the timing of tax audit outcomes.
|
We have agreements with financial institutions to sell certain of our trade receivables and promissory notes from customers without recourse. In addition, from time to time we will discount, without recourse, letters of credit (“LCs”) received from customers in payment for goods.
The following table shows total receivables sold under factoring agreements and proceeds from sales of LCs and related discounting fees paid for the years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Receivables sold under factoring agreements
|
$
|
313,578
|
|
$
|
107,666
|
|
$
|
262,998
|
|
||
|
Proceeds from sales of LCs
|
$
|
140,534
|
|
$
|
37,226
|
|
$
|
27,799
|
|
||
|
Discounting fees paid on sales of LCs(1)
|
$
|
213
|
|
$
|
189
|
|
$
|
145
|
|
||
__________________
|
(1)
|
Discounting fees include bank fees and interest expense and were recorded in interest income and other, net.
|
We maintain guarantee arrangements available through various financial institutions for up to
$20.4 million
, of which
$17.9 million
had been issued as of
June 30, 2011
primarily to fund guarantees to customs authorities for VAT and other operating requirements of our subsidiaries in Europe and Asia.
We maintain certain open inventory purchase commitments with our suppliers to ensure a smooth and continuous supply for key components. Our liability under these purchase commitments is generally restricted to a forecasted time-horizon as mutually agreed upon between the parties. This forecasted time-horizon can vary among different suppliers. Our open inventory purchase commitments were approximately
$352 million
as of
June 30, 2011
, and are primarily due within the next 12 months. Actual expenditures will vary based upon the volume of the transactions and length of contractual service provided. In addition, the amounts paid under these arrangements may be less in the event that the arrangements are renegotiated or canceled. Certain agreements provide for potential cancellation penalties.
44
We provide standard warranty coverage on our systems for 40 hours per week for twelve months, providing labor and parts necessary to repair the systems during the warranty period. We account for the estimated warranty cost as a charge to costs of revenues when revenue is recognized. The estimated warranty cost is based on historical product performance and field expenses. The actual product performance and/or field expense profiles may differ, and in those cases we adjust our warranty accruals accordingly. The difference between the estimated and actual warranty costs tends to be larger for new product introductions as there is limited historical product performance to estimate warranty expense; more mature products with longer product performance histories tend to be more stable in our warranty charge estimates. Non-standard warranty coverage generally includes services incremental to the standard 40-hour per week coverage for twelve months. See Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies” to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a detailed description.
Working capital increased to
$2.8 billion
as of
June 30, 2011
, compared to
$2.1 billion
as of
June 30, 2010
. This increase is primarily due to cash generated from operations, offset by cash payments for our stock repurchase program, cash payments of dividends to stockholders, and purchases of fixed assets. As of
June 30, 2011
, our principal sources of liquidity consisted of
$2.0 billion
of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. Our liquidity is affected by many factors, some of which are based on the normal ongoing operations of the business, and others of which relate to the uncertainties of global economies and the semiconductor and the semiconductor equipment industries. Although cash requirements will fluctuate based on the timing and extent of these factors, we believe that cash generated from operations, together with the liquidity provided by existing cash balances, will be sufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements for at least the next twelve months.
Our credit ratings and outlooks as of July 11,
2011
are summarized below:
|
Rating Agency
|
Rating
|
|
Outlook
|
|
Fitch
|
BBB
|
|
Stable
|
|
Moody’s
|
Baa1
|
|
Stable
|
|
Standard & Poor’s
|
BBB
|
|
Stable
|
Factors that can affect our credit ratings include changes in our operating performance, the economic environment, conditions in the semiconductor and semiconductor equipment industries, our financial position, and changes in our business strategy.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
Under our foreign currency risk management strategy, we utilize derivative instruments to protect our interests from unanticipated fluctuations in earnings and cash flows caused by volatility in currency exchange rates. This financial exposure is monitored and managed as an integral part of our overall risk management program, which focuses on the unpredictability of financial markets and seeks to reduce the potentially adverse effects that the volatility of these markets may have on our operating results. We continue our policy of hedging our current and forecasted foreign currency exposures with hedging instruments having tenors of up to 18 months (see Note 16, “Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a detailed description). Our outstanding hedge contracts, with maximum maturity of 18 months, were as follows:
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Cash flow hedge contracts
|
|||||||
|
Purchase
|
$
|
3,381
|
|
$
|
15,835
|
|
|
|
Sell
|
$
|
30,133
|
|
$
|
32,853
|
|
|
|
Other foreign currency hedge contracts
|
|||||||
|
Purchase
|
$
|
174,499
|
|
$
|
82,535
|
|
|
|
Sell
|
$
|
216,738
|
|
$
|
104,414
|
|
|
Indemnification Obligations.
Subject to certain limitations, we are obligated to indemnify our current and former directors, officers and employees with respect to certain litigation matters and investigations that arise in connection with their service to us. These obligations arise under the terms of our certificate of incorporation, our bylaws, applicable contracts, and Delaware and California law. The obligation to indemnify generally means that we are required to pay or reimburse the individuals’ reasonable legal expenses and possibly damages and other liabilities incurred in connection with these matters. We paid or reimbursed legal expenses incurred in connection with the investigation of our historical stock option practices and the related litigation and government inquiries by a number of our current and former directors, officers and employees. We are currently paying defense costs to one former officer and employee facing an SEC civil action to which we are not a party.
45
Although the maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these agreements is theoretically unlimited, we believe the fair value of this liability, to the extent estimable, is appropriately considered within the reserve we have established for currently pending legal proceedings.
We are a party to a variety of agreements pursuant to which we may be obligated to indemnify the other party with respect to certain matters. Typically, these obligations arise in connection with contracts and license agreements or the sale of assets, under which we customarily agree to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from, or provide customers with other remedies to protect against, bodily injury or damage to personal property caused by our products, non-compliance with our product performance specifications, infringement by our products of third-party intellectual property rights and a breach of warranties, representations and covenants related to such matters as title to assets sold, validity of certain intellectual property rights, non-infringement of third-party rights, and certain income tax-related matters. In each of these circumstances, payment by us is typically subject to the other party making a claim to and cooperating with us pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. This usually allows us to challenge the other party’s claims or, in case of breach of intellectual property representations or covenants, to control the defense or settlement of any third-party claims brought against the other party. Further, our obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of amounts, activity (typically at our option to replace or correct the products or terminate the agreement with a refund to the other party), and duration. In some instances, we may have recourse against third parties and/or insurance covering certain payments made by us.
It is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future payments under these or similar agreements due to the conditional nature of our obligations and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, payments made by us under these agreements have not had a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
46
|
ITEM 7A.
|
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and marketable equity security prices. To mitigate these risks, we utilize derivative financial instruments, such as foreign currency hedges. We do not use derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes. All of the potential changes noted below are based on sensitivity analyses performed on our financial position as of
June 30, 2011
. Actual results may differ materially.
As of
June 30, 2011
, we had an investment portfolio of fixed income securities of $1.3 billion, excluding those classified as cash and cash equivalents. These securities, as with all fixed income instruments, are subject to interest rate risk and will fall in value if market interest rates increase. If market interest rates were to increase immediately and uniformly by 10% from levels as of
June 30, 2011
, the fair value of the portfolio would decline by $1.1 million.
As of
June 30, 2011
, we had net forward and option contracts to sell
$69.0 million
in foreign currency in order to hedge certain currency exposures (detail of these contracts and hedging activities is included in Note 16, “Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” to the Consolidated Financial Statements). If we had entered into these contracts on
June 30, 2011
, the U.S. dollar equivalent would have been
$69.1 million
. A 10% adverse move in all currency exchange rates affecting the contracts would decrease the fair value of the contracts by $18.3 million. However, if this occurred, the fair value of the underlying exposures hedged by the contracts would increase by a similar amount. Accordingly, we believe that, as a result of the hedging of certain of our foreign currency exposure, changes in most relevant foreign currency exchange rates should have no material impact on our income or cash flows.
In April 2008, we issued
$750 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.90%
senior unsecured notes due in 2018. The fair market value of long-term fixed interest rate debt is subject to interest rate risk. Generally, the fair market value of fixed interest rate debt will increase as interest rates fall and decrease as interest rates rise. As of
June 30, 2011
, the book value and the fair value of our fixed rate debt were
$746.3 million
and
$863.5 million
, respectively. As of
June 30, 2010
, the book value and the fair value of our fixed rate debt were
$745.7 million
and
$834.4 million
, respectively.
47
|
ITEM 8.
|
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
|
48
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
ASSETS
|
|||||||
|
Current assets:
|
|||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
711,329
|
|
$
|
529,918
|
|
|
|
Marketable securities
|
1,327,206
|
|
1,004,126
|
|
|||
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
583,270
|
|
440,125
|
|
|||
|
Inventories, net
|
575,730
|
|
401,730
|
|
|||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
331,397
|
|
328,522
|
|
|||
|
Other current assets
|
147,078
|
|
131,044
|
|
|||
|
Total current assets
|
3,676,010
|
|
2,835,465
|
|
|||
|
Land, property and equipment, net
|
257,358
|
|
236,752
|
|
|||
|
Goodwill
|
328,156
|
|
328,006
|
|
|||
|
Purchased intangibles, net
|
85,902
|
|
117,336
|
|
|||
|
Other non-current assets
|
328,095
|
|
389,497
|
|
|||
|
Total assets
|
$
|
4,675,521
|
|
$
|
3,907,056
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|||||||
|
Current liabilities:
|
|||||||
|
Accounts payable
|
$
|
142,945
|
|
$
|
107,938
|
|
|
|
Deferred system profit
|
192,338
|
|
204,764
|
|
|||
|
Unearned revenue
|
44,264
|
|
37,026
|
|
|||
|
Other current liabilities
|
502,471
|
|
422,059
|
|
|||
|
Total current liabilities
|
882,018
|
|
771,787
|
|
|||
|
Non-current liabilities:
|
|||||||
|
Long-term debt
|
746,290
|
|
745,747
|
|
|||
|
Income tax payable
|
78,337
|
|
53,492
|
|
|||
|
Unearned revenue
|
34,905
|
|
20,354
|
|
|||
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
73,078
|
|
69,065
|
|
|||
|
Total liabilities
|
1,814,628
|
|
1,660,445
|
|
|||
|
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 13 and 14)
|
|
|
|||||
|
Stockholders’ equity:
|
|||||||
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 1,000 shares authorized, none outstanding
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 500,000 shares authorized, 244,281 and 239,132 shares issued, 167,118 and 168,043 shares outstanding, as of June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010, respectively
|
167
|
|
168
|
|
|||
|
Capital in excess of par value
|
1,010,492
|
|
921,292
|
|
|||
|
Retained earnings
|
1,852,633
|
|
1,356,454
|
|
|||
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
(2,399
|
)
|
(31,303
|
)
|
|||
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
2,860,893
|
|
2,246,611
|
|
|||
|
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$
|
4,675,521
|
|
$
|
3,907,056
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
49
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Operations
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Revenues:
|
|||||||||||
|
Product
|
$
|
2,613,438
|
|
$
|
1,324,270
|
|
$
|
1,062,126
|
|
||
|
Service
|
561,729
|
|
496,490
|
|
458,090
|
|
|||||
|
Total revenues
|
3,175,167
|
|
1,820,760
|
|
1,520,216
|
|
|||||
|
Costs and operating expenses:
|
|||||||||||
|
Costs of revenues
|
1,259,243
|
|
815,662
|
|
864,824
|
|
|||||
|
Engineering, research and development
|
386,163
|
|
329,560
|
|
371,463
|
|
|||||
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
369,431
|
|
361,372
|
|
415,126
|
|
|||||
|
Goodwill and purchased intangible assets impairment
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
446,744
|
|
|||||
|
Total costs and operating expenses
|
2,014,837
|
|
1,506,594
|
|
2,098,157
|
|
|||||
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
1,160,330
|
|
314,166
|
|
(577,941
|
)
|
|||||
|
Interest income and other, net
|
4,064
|
|
31,532
|
|
30,749
|
|
|||||
|
Interest expense
|
54,328
|
|
54,517
|
|
55,339
|
|
|||||
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
1,110,066
|
|
291,181
|
|
(602,531
|
)
|
|||||
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
315,578
|
|
78,881
|
|
(79,163
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net income (loss)
|
$
|
794,488
|
|
$
|
212,300
|
|
$
|
(523,368
|
)
|
||
|
Net income (loss) per share:
|
|||||||||||
|
Basic
|
$
|
4.75
|
|
$
|
1.24
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
||
|
Diluted
|
$
|
4.66
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
||
|
Cash dividends declared per share
|
$
|
1.00
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
||
|
Weighted-average number of shares:
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Basic
|
167,261
|
|
170,652
|
|
170,253
|
|
|||||
|
Diluted
|
170,352
|
|
173,034
|
|
170,253
|
|
|||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
50
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity
|
|
Common Stock and
Capital in Excess of
Par Value
|
Retained
Earnings
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
|
Total
Stockholders’
Equity
|
||||||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Balances as of June 30, 2008
|
174,038
|
|
$
|
729,629
|
|
$
|
2,204,417
|
|
$
|
47,684
|
|
$
|
2,981,730
|
|
||||
|
Components of comprehensive loss:
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Net loss
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(523,368
|
)
|
—
|
|
(523,368
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized gain on defined benefit plan assets, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
2,467
|
|
2,467
|
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized gain on investments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
4,829
|
|
4,829
|
|
||||||||
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(79,463
|
)
|
(79,463
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Deferred gains on cash flow hedging instruments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
3,266
|
|
3,266
|
|
||||||||
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
(592,269
|
)
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net issuance under employee stock plans
|
3,041
|
|
27,856
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
27,856
|
|
||||||||
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
(6,410
|
)
|
(9,930
|
)
|
(208,768
|
)
|
—
|
|
(218,698
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Cash dividends declared ($0.60 per share)
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(102,149
|
)
|
—
|
|
(102,149
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
—
|
|
105,535
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
105,535
|
|
||||||||
|
Tax charges for stock option transactions
|
—
|
|
(17,613
|
)
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(17,613
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Balances as of June 30, 2009
|
170,669
|
|
835,477
|
|
1,370,132
|
|
(21,217
|
)
|
2,184,392
|
|
||||||||
|
Components of comprehensive income:
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
212,300
|
|
—
|
|
212,300
|
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized loss on defined benefit plan assets, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(4,446
|
)
|
(4,446
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized gain on investments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
36
|
|
36
|
|
||||||||
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(5,439
|
)
|
(5,439
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Deferred losses on cash flow hedging instruments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(237
|
)
|
(237
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Total comprehensive income
|
202,214
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net issuance under employee stock plans
|
1,999
|
|
22,353
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
22,353
|
|
||||||||
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
(4,625
|
)
|
(17,341
|
)
|
(123,569
|
)
|
—
|
|
(140,910
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Cash dividends declared ($0.60 per share)
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(102,409
|
)
|
—
|
|
(102,409
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
—
|
|
85,982
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
85,982
|
|
||||||||
|
Tax charges for stock option transactions
|
—
|
|
(5,011
|
)
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(5,011
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Balances as of June 30, 2010
|
168,043
|
|
921,460
|
|
1,356,454
|
|
(31,303
|
)
|
2,246,611
|
|
||||||||
|
Components of comprehensive income:
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Net income
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
794,488
|
|
—
|
|
794,488
|
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized loss on defined benefit plan assets, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(643
|
)
|
(643
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Change in unrealized gain on investments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
347
|
|
347
|
|
||||||||
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
27,951
|
|
27,951
|
|
||||||||
|
Deferred gains on cash flow hedging instruments, net of tax
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
1,249
|
|
1,249
|
|
||||||||
|
Total comprehensive income
|
823,392
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Net issuance under employee stock plans
|
5,002
|
|
102,016
|
|
—
|
|
102,016
|
|
||||||||||
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
(6,190
|
)
|
(102,013
|
)
|
(130,911
|
)
|
—
|
|
(232,924
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Issuance of common stock for litigation settlement related to historical stock option practices
|
263
|
|
7,766
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
7,766
|
|
||||||||
|
Cash dividends declared ($1.00 per share)
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
(167,398
|
)
|
—
|
|
(167,398
|
)
|
||||||||
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
—
|
|
81,430
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
81,430
|
|
||||||||
|
Balances as of June 30, 2011
|
167,118
|
|
$
|
1,010,659
|
|
$
|
1,852,633
|
|
$
|
(2,399
|
)
|
$
|
2,860,893
|
|
||||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
51
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
Year Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|||||||||||
|
Net income (loss)
|
$
|
794,488
|
|
$
|
212,300
|
|
$
|
(523,368
|
)
|
||
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
|||||||||||
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
86,044
|
|
87,348
|
|
135,848
|
|
|||||
|
Asset impairment charges
|
10,568
|
|
15,149
|
|
452,620
|
|
|||||
|
Net gain on sale of real estate assets
|
(1,372
|
)
|
(2,984
|
)
|
(4,071
|
)
|
|||||
|
Non-cash stock-based compensation expense
|
81,430
|
|
85,982
|
|
105,535
|
|
|||||
|
Provision for doubtful accounts
|
—
|
|
(2,888
|
)
|
23,279
|
|
|||||
|
Net loss (gain) on sale of marketable securities and other investments
|
(2,479
|
)
|
(5,077
|
)
|
635
|
|
|||||
|
Deferred income taxes
|
64,736
|
|
(19,865
|
)
|
59,697
|
|
|||||
|
Tax charge from equity awards
|
—
|
|
(5,133
|
)
|
(17,880
|
)
|
|||||
|
Excess tax benefit from equity awards
|
(71
|
)
|
—
|
|
(1,691
|
)
|
|||||
|
Changes in assets and liabilities, net of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in business combinations:
|
|||||||||||
|
Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable, net
|
(128,219
|
)
|
(220,857
|
)
|
277,331
|
|
|||||
|
Decrease (increase) in inventories
|
(170,141
|
)
|
(27,715
|
)
|
120,249
|
|
|||||
|
Decrease (increase) in other assets
|
(56,743
|
)
|
102,033
|
|
17,729
|
|
|||||
|
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
|
34,259
|
|
44,381
|
|
(46,796
|
)
|
|||||
|
Increase (decrease) in deferred system profit
|
(12,425
|
)
|
108,943
|
|
(54,978
|
)
|
|||||
|
Increase (decrease) in other liabilities
|
123,091
|
|
76,183
|
|
(348,455
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
823,166
|
|
447,800
|
|
195,684
|
|
|||||
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|||||||||||
|
Acquisitions of businesses, net of cash received
|
—
|
|
(1,500
|
)
|
(141,399
|
)
|
|||||
|
Capital expenditures, net
|
(51,151
|
)
|
(30,202
|
)
|
(22,226
|
)
|
|||||
|
Proceeds from sale of assets
|
18,185
|
|
5,878
|
|
21,814
|
|
|||||
|
Purchase of available-for-sale securities
|
(1,142,491
|
)
|
(1,080,412
|
)
|
(1,008,905
|
)
|
|||||
|
Proceeds from sale and maturity of available-for-sale securities
|
795,762
|
|
854,970
|
|
653,291
|
|
|||||
|
Purchase of trading securities
|
(63,005
|
)
|
(77,295
|
)
|
(67,240
|
)
|
|||||
|
Proceeds from sale of trading securities
|
83,190
|
|
100,597
|
|
79,765
|
|
|||||
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
(359,510
|
)
|
(227,964
|
)
|
(484,900
|
)
|
|||||
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|||||||||||
|
Issuance of common stock
|
124,573
|
|
35,867
|
|
40,108
|
|
|||||
|
Tax withholding payments related to vested and released restricted stock units
|
(22,557
|
)
|
(13,514
|
)
|
(12,252
|
)
|
|||||
|
Payment of dividends to stockholders
|
(167,398
|
)
|
(102,409
|
)
|
(102,149
|
)
|
|||||
|
Excess tax benefit from equity awards
|
71
|
|
—
|
|
1,691
|
|
|||||
|
Common stock repurchases
|
(234,844
|
)
|
(136,275
|
)
|
(226,515
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
(300,155
|
)
|
(216,331
|
)
|
(299,117
|
)
|
|||||
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
17,910
|
|
1,446
|
|
(14,806
|
)
|
|||||
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
181,411
|
|
4,951
|
|
(603,139
|
)
|
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
529,918
|
|
524,967
|
|
1,128,106
|
|
|||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$
|
711,329
|
|
$
|
529,918
|
|
$
|
524,967
|
|
||
|
Supplemental cash flow disclosures:
|
|||||||||||
|
Income taxes paid (refunds received), net
|
$
|
262,086
|
|
$
|
(13,989
|
)
|
$
|
(23,144
|
)
|
||
|
Interest paid
|
$
|
52,819
|
|
$
|
52,438
|
|
$
|
56,021
|
|
||
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
52
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
NOTE 1— SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Description of Operations and Principles of Consolidation.
KLA-Tencor Corporation (“KLA-Tencor” or the “Company”) is a leading supplier of process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries. Headquartered in Milpitas, California, KLA-Tencor has subsidiaries both in the United States and in key markets throughout the world.
The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of KLA-Tencor and its majority-owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Management Estimates.
The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the Consolidated Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments.
KLA-Tencor has evaluated the estimated fair value of financial instruments using available market information and valuations as provided by third-party sources. The use of different market assumptions and/or estimation methodologies could have a significant effect on the estimated fair value amounts. The fair value of the Company's cash, cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and other current liabilities approximate their carrying amounts due to the relatively short maturity of these items.
Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities.
All highly liquid debt instruments with original or remaining maturities of less than three months at the date of purchase are considered to be cash equivalents. Marketable securities are generally classified as available-for-sale for use in current operations, if required, and are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, presented as a separate component of stockholders’ equity under the caption “Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).” All realized gains and losses and unrealized losses resulting from declines in fair value that are other than temporary are recorded in earnings in the period of occurrence. The specific identification method is used to determine the realized gains and losses on investments. For all investments in debt and equity securities, the Company assesses whether the impairment is other than temporary. If the fair value of a debt security is less than its amortized cost basis, an impairment is considered other than temporary if (i) the Company has the intent to sell the security or it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery of its entire amortized cost basis, or (ii) the Company does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost of the security. If an impairment is considered other than temporary based on condition (i), the entire difference between the amortized cost and the fair value of the security is recognized in earnings. If an impairment is considered other than temporary based on condition (ii), the amount representing credit losses, defined as the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis of the debt security, will be recognized in earnings, and the amount relating to all other factors will be recognized in other comprehensive income. The Company evaluates both qualitative and quantitative factors such as duration and severity of the unrealized loss, credit ratings, default and loss rates of the underlying collateral, structure and credit enhancements to determine if a credit loss may exist.
Non-Marketable Equity Securities and Other Investments.
KLA-Tencor acquires certain equity investments for the promotion of business and strategic objectives, and, to the extent these investments continue to have strategic value, the Company typically does not attempt to reduce or eliminate the inherent market risks. Non-marketable equity securities and other investments are recorded at historical cost. Non-marketable equity securities and other investments are included in “Other non-current assets” on the balance sheet. Non-marketable equity securities are subject to a periodic impairment review; however, there are no open-market valuations, and the impairment analysis requires significant judgment. This analysis includes assessment of the investee’s financial condition, the business outlook for its products and technology, its projected results and cash flow, the likelihood of obtaining subsequent rounds of financing and the impact of any relevant contractual equity preferences held by the Company or others.
Variable Interest Entities.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) requires that if the Company is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity, the assets, liabilities and results of operations of the variable interest entity should be included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. KLA-Tencor has concluded that none of the Company’s equity investments are material to the Company’s financial position and do not require consolidation as they are either not variable interest entities or, of the equity investments that are variable interest entities, the Company is not considered to be the primary beneficiary based on an assessment performed by management.
53
Inventories.
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (on a first-in, first-out basis) or market. Demonstration units are stated at their manufacturing cost and written down to their net realizable value. The Company reviews and sets standard costs semi-annually at current manufacturing costs in order to approximate actual costs. The Company’s manufacturing overhead standards for product costs are calculated assuming full absorption of forecasted spending over projected volumes, adjusted for excess capacity. Abnormal inventory costs such as costs of idle facilities, excess freight and handling costs, and spoilage are recognized as current period charges. The Company writes down product inventory based on forecasted demand and technological obsolescence and parts inventory based on forecasted usage. These factors are impacted by market and economic conditions, technology changes, new product introductions and changes in strategic direction and require estimates that may include uncertain elements. Actual demand may differ from forecasted demand, and such differences may have a material effect on recorded inventory values.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts.
A majority of the Company’s trade receivables are derived from sales to large multinational semiconductor manufacturers throughout the world. In order to monitor potential credit losses, the Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition. An allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained for probable credit losses based upon the Company’s assessment of the expected collectibility of the accounts receivable. The allowance for doubtful accounts is reviewed on a quarterly basis to assess the adequacy of the allowance.
Property and Equipment.
Property and equipment are recorded at cost, net of accumulated depreciation. Depreciation of property and equipment is based on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which are generally thirty to thirty-five years for buildings, ten to fifteen years for leasehold improvements, five to seven years for furniture and fixtures, and two to five years for machinery and equipment. Leasehold improvements are amortized by the straight-line method over the shorter of the life of the related asset or the term of the underlying lease. Construction in process assets are not depreciated until the assets are placed in service. Depreciation expense for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
was
$39.3 million
,
$43.5 million
and
$54.7 million
, respectively.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets.
The Company assesses goodwill for impairment annually as well as whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. Long-lived intangible assets are tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. See Note 6, “Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets” for a detailed description. Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in each business combination. The Company conducted its annual evaluation of goodwill by reporting unit during the three months ended December 31,
2010
and concluded that there was no impairment. There have been no significant events or circumstances affecting the valuation of goodwill subsequent to the impairment test performed in the three months ended December 31,
2010
. The next annual evaluation of the goodwill by reporting unit will be performed in the three months ending December 31,
2011
.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets.
KLA-Tencor evaluates the carrying value of its long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of the asset may be impaired. An impairment loss is recognized when estimated future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset, including disposition, is less than the carrying value of the asset. Such an impairment charge would be measured as the excess of the carrying value of the asset over its fair value.
Software Development Costs.
KLA-Tencor capitalizes certain internal and external costs incurred to acquire and create internal use software. Capitalized software is included in property and equipment when development is complete and is depreciated over three to five years when placed in service.
Concentration of Credit Risk.
Financial instruments that potentially subject KLA-Tencor to significant concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents, short-term and non-current marketable securities, trade accounts receivable and derivative financial instruments used in hedging activities. The Company invests in a variety of financial instruments, such as, but not limited to, certificates of deposit, corporate and municipal securities, United States Treasury and Government agency securities, and equity securities and, by policy, limits the amount of credit exposure with any one financial institution or commercial issuer. The Company has not experienced any material credit losses on its investments.
A majority of the Company's trade receivables are derived from sales to large multinational semiconductor manufacturers located throughout the world, with a majority located in Asia. Concentration of credit risk with respect to trade receivables is considered to be limited due to the Company’s customer base and the diversity of its geographic sales areas. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition and generally requires no collateral to secure accounts receivable. The Company maintains an allowance for potential credit losses based upon expected collectibility of all accounts receivable. In addition, the Company may utilize letters of credit or non-recourse factoring to mitigate credit risk when considered appropriate.
54
The Company is exposed to credit loss in the event of non-performance by counterparties on the foreign exchange contracts that the Company uses in hedging activities and in certain factoring transactions. These counterparties are large international financial institutions, and to date no such counterparty has failed to meet its financial obligations under such contracts.
For the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, the following customers each accounted for more than
10%
of total revenues:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
Intel Corporation
|
||
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
||
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
—
|
—
|
||
As of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, the following customers each accounted for more than
10%
of net accounts receivable:
|
As of June 30,
|
||
|
2011
|
2010
|
|
|
GlobalFoundries Inc.
|
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
|
|
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited
|
|
Foreign Currency.
The functional currencies of KLA-Tencor’s foreign subsidiaries are the local currencies, except as described below. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities of these foreign operations are translated to U.S. dollars at current period end exchange rates, and revenues and expenses are translated to U.S. dollars using average exchange rates in effect during the period. The gains and losses from foreign currency translation of these subsidiaries’ financial statements are recorded directly into a separate component of stockholders’ equity under the caption “Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).”
The Company's manufacturing subsidiaries in Germany, Israel, Belgium, Hong Kong and Singapore use the U.S. dollar as their functional currency. Accordingly, monetary assets and liabilities in non-functional currency of these subsidiaries are remeasured using exchange rates in effect at the end of the period. Revenues and costs in local currency are remeasured using average exchange rates for the period, except for costs related to those balance sheet items that are remeasured using historical exchange rates. The resulting remeasurement gains and losses are included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations as incurred.
Derivative Financial Instruments.
KLA-Tencor uses financial instruments, such as forward exchange contracts and currency options, to hedge a portion of, but not all, existing and forecasted foreign currency denominated transactions. The purpose of the Company's foreign currency program is to manage the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on certain foreign currency denominated revenues, costs and eventual cash flows. The effect of exchange rate changes on forward exchange contracts is expected to offset the effect of exchange rate changes on the underlying hedged items. The Company believes these financial instruments do not subject the Company to speculative risk that would otherwise result from changes in currency exchange rates. The Company does not use derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes.
All of the Company's derivative financial instruments are recorded at fair value based upon quoted market prices for comparable instruments adjusted for risk of counterparty non-performance. For derivative instruments designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges of forecasted foreign currency denominated transactions expected to occur within twelve months, the effective portion of the gain or loss on these hedges is reported as a component of "Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)" in stockholders’ equity, and is reclassified into earnings when the hedged transaction affects earnings. If the transaction being hedged fails to occur, or if a portion of any derivative is (or becomes) ineffective, the gain or loss on the associated financial instrument is recorded immediately in earnings. For derivative instruments used to hedge existing foreign currency denominated assets or liabilities, the gain or loss on these hedges is recorded immediately in earnings to offset the changes in the fair value of the assets or liabilities being hedged.
Warranty.
KLA-Tencor provides standard warranty coverage on its systems for
40
hours per week for twelve months, providing labor and parts necessary to repair the systems during the warranty period. The Company accounts for the estimated warranty cost as a charge to costs of revenues when revenue is recognized. The estimated warranty cost is based on historical product performance and field expenses. Utilizing actual service records, the Company calculates the average service hours and
55
parts expense per system and applies the actual labor and overhead rates to determine the estimated warranty charge. The Company updates these estimated charges on a quarterly basis. The actual product performance and/or field expense profiles may differ, and in those cases the Company adjusts its warranty accruals accordingly (see Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies”).
Revenue Recognition.
KLA-Tencor recognizes revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have been rendered, the selling price is fixed or determinable, and collectibility is reasonably assured. The Company derives revenue from three sources—sales of systems, spare parts and services. The Company typically recognizes revenue for system sales upon acceptance by the customer that the system has been installed and is operating according to predetermined specifications. Under certain circumstances, however, the Company recognizes revenue prior to acceptance from the customer, as follows:
|
•
|
When system sales to independent distributors have no installation requirement, contain no acceptance agreement, and 100% payment is due upon shipment, revenue is recognized upon shipment.
|
|
•
|
When the installation of the system is deemed perfunctory, revenue is recognized upon shipment. The portion of revenue associated with installation is deferred based on estimated fair value, and that revenue is recognized upon completion of the installation.
|
|
•
|
When the customer fab has previously accepted the same tool, with the same specifications, and it can be objectively demonstrated that the tool meets all of the required acceptance criteria upon shipment, revenue is recognized upon shipment. The portion of revenue associated with installation is deferred based on estimated fair value, and that revenue is recognized upon completion of the installation.
|
|
•
|
When the customer withholds acceptance due to issues unrelated to product performance, revenue is recognized when the system is performing as intended and meets all published and contractually agreed specifications.
|
|
•
|
When the system is damaged during transit and title has passed to the customer, revenue is recognized upon receipt of cash payment from the customer.
|
The Company also allows for multiple element revenue arrangements in cases where certain elements of a sales arrangement are not delivered and accepted in one reporting period. In such cases, the Company defers the relative fair value of the undelivered elements until that element is delivered to the customer. To be considered a separate element, the product or service in question must represent a separate unit of accounting and fulfill the following criteria: (a) the delivered item(s) has value to the customer on a standalone basis; (b) there is objective and reliable evidence of the fair value of the undelivered items(s); and (c) if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative to the delivered item(s), delivery or performance of the undelivered item(s) is considered probable and substantially in the control of the Company. If the arrangement does not meet all the above criteria, the entire amount of the sales contract is deferred until all elements are accepted by the customer.
In many instances, products are sold in stand-alone arrangements. Services are sold separately through renewals of annual maintenance contracts. As a result, for substantially all of the arrangements with multiple deliverables pertaining to products and services, the Company uses vendor-specific objective evidence ("VSOE") or third-party evidence ("TPE") to allocate the selling price to each deliverable. The Company determines TPE based on historical prices charged for products and services when sold on a stand-alone basis.
When the Company is unable to establish relative selling price using VSOE or TPE, the Company uses estimated selling price ("ESP") in its allocation of arrangement consideration. The objective of ESP is to determine the price at which the Company would transact a sale if the product or service were sold on a stand-alone basis. ESP could potentially be used for new or customized products.
The Company regularly reviews relative selling prices and maintains internal controls over the establishment and updates of these estimates.
Trade-in rights are occasionally granted to customers to trade in tools in connection with subsequent purchases. The Company estimates the value of the trade-in right and reduces the revenue of the initial sale. This amount is recognized at the earlier of the exercise of the trade-in right or the expiration of the trade-in right.
Spare parts revenue is recognized when the product has been shipped, risk of loss has passed to the customer and collection of the resulting receivable is probable.
56
Service and maintenance contract revenue is recognized ratably over the term of the maintenance contract. If maintenance is included in an arrangement that includes a software license agreement, amounts related to maintenance are allocated based on fair value. Services performed in the absence of a contract, such as consulting and training revenue, are recognized when the related services are performed and collectibility is reasonably assured.
The deferred system profit balance equals the amount of deferred system revenue that was invoiced and due on shipment, less applicable product and warranty costs. Deferred system revenue represents the value of products that have been shipped and billed to customers which has not met the Company's revenue recognition criteria. Deferred system profit does not include the profit associated with product shipments to customers in Japan, to whom title does not transfer until customer acceptance. Shipments to customers in Japan are classified as inventory at cost until the time of acceptance.
The Company also defers the fair value of non-standard warranty bundled with equipment sales as unearned revenue. Non-standard warranty includes services incremental to the standard
40
-hour per week coverage for twelve months. Non-standard warranty is recognized ratably as revenue when the applicable warranty term period commences.
Research and Development Costs.
Research and development costs are expensed as incurred.
Strategic Development Agreements.
Gross engineering, research and development expenses were partially offset by
$18.8 million
,
$13.7 million
and
$21.7 million
in external funding received under certain strategic development programs primarily from government grants in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively.
Shipping and Handling Costs.
Shipping and handling costs are included as a component of cost of sales.
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation Plans.
The fair value of stock-based awards is measured at the grant date and is recognized as expense over the employee’s requisite service period. The fair value is determined using a Black-Scholes valuation model for purchase rights under the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan and using the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the grant date for restricted stock units. The Company has elected to not include the indirect tax effects of stock-based compensation deductions when calculating the windfall benefits and recognizes the full effect of these deductions in the income statement in the period in which the taxable event occurs.
Advertising Expenses.
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Advertising expenses for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
were
$2.2 million
,
$1.6 million
and
$2.3 million
, respectively.
Income Taxes.
KLA-Tencor accounts for income taxes in accordance with the authoritative guidance, which requires that deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using enacted tax rates for the effect of temporary differences between the book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities. The guidance also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that a portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. The Company has determined that a valuation allowance was necessary against a portion of the deferred tax assets, but that its future taxable income will be sufficient to recover the remainder of its deferred tax assets. However, should there be a change in the Company’s ability to recover its deferred tax assets, the Company could be required to record a valuation allowance against its deferred tax assets. This would result in an increase to the Company’s tax provision in the period in which the Company determined that the recovery was not probable.
The Company applies a two-step approach, based on authoritative guidance, to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained in audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. The Company reevaluates these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis. This evaluation is based on factors including, but not limited to, changes in facts or circumstances, changes in tax law, effectively settled issues under audit, and new audit activity. Any change in these factors could result in the recognition of a tax benefit or an additional charge to the tax provision.
Earnings Per Share.
Basic earnings per share (“EPS”) is calculated by dividing net income available to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share is calculated by using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period increased to include the number of additional shares of common stock that would have been outstanding if the dilutive potential shares of common stock had been issued. The dilutive effect of outstanding options and restricted stock units is reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the treasury stock method. The dilutive securities are excluded from the computation of diluted net loss per share when a net loss is recorded for the period as their effect would be anti-dilutive.
57
Contingencies and Litigation.
The Company is subject to the possibility of losses from various contingencies. Considerable judgment is necessary to estimate the probability and amount of any loss from such contingencies. An accrual is made when it is probable that a liability has been incurred or an asset has been impaired and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company accrues a liability and recognizes as expense the estimated costs expected to be incurred over the next twelve months to defend or settle asserted and unasserted claims existing as of the balance sheet date. See Note 13, “Commitments and Contingencies” and Note 14, “Litigation and Other Legal Matters” for a detailed description.
Reclassifications.
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior year financial statements to conform to the current year presentation. The reclassifications had no effect on the Consolidated Statements of Operations or Cash Flows.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements.
In June 2011, the FASB amended its guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income. Under the amended guidance, an entity has the option to present comprehensive income in either one continuous statement or two consecutive financial statements. A single statement must present the components of net income and total net income, the components of other comprehensive income and total other comprehensive income, and a total for comprehensive income. In a two-statement approach, an entity must present the components of net income and total net income in the first statement. That statement must be immediately followed by a financial statement that presents the components of other comprehensive income, a total for other comprehensive income, and a total for comprehensive income. The option under current guidance that permits the presentation of components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders' equity has been eliminated. The amendment becomes effective retrospectively for the Company's interim period ending March 31, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. The Company does not expect that this guidance will have an impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature.
In May 2011, the FASB amended its guidance
to converge fair value measurement and disclosure guidance about fair value measurement under U.S. GAAP with International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"). IFRS is a comprehensive series of accounting standards published by the International Accounting Standards Board
.
The amendment changes the wording used to describe many of the requirements in U.S. GAAP for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements. For many of the requirements, the FASB does not intend for the amendment to result in a change in the application of the requirements in the current authoritative guidance. The amendment becomes effective prospectively for the Company's interim period ending March 31, 2012. Early application is not permitted. The Company does not expect the amendment to have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on goodwill and other intangible assets. The amendment modifies Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. For those reporting units, an entity is required to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if there are qualitative factors indicating that it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. The qualitative factors are consistent with the existing guidance which requires goodwill of a reporting unit to be tested for impairment between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. This amendment was effective for the Company’s interim period ended March 31, 2011. The amendment did not have an impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on business combinations. Under the amended guidance, a public entity that presents comparative financial statements must disclose the revenues and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the prior annual reporting period. The amendment was effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date was on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. Early adoption is permitted. The amendment did not have an impact on the Company's financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In April 2010, the FASB amended its guidance on share-based payment awards denominated in certain currencies. The amendment clarifies that an employee share-based payment award with an exercise price denominated in the currency of a market in which a substantial portion of the entity’s equity securities trades should not be considered to contain a condition that is not a market, performance, or service condition. Therefore, an entity would not classify such an award as a liability if it otherwise qualifies as equity. This amendment becomes effective for the Company’s interim period ending September 30, 2011. The Company does not expect the implementation to have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In January 2010, the FASB issued authoritative guidance for fair value measurements. This guidance now requires a reporting entity to disclose separately the amounts of significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and also to describe the reasons for these transfers. This authoritative guidance also requires enhanced disclosure of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements. The guidance for Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements was effective for the Company’s interim reporting period ended March 31, 2010. The implementation did not have an impact on the Company’s
58
financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature. The guidance for Level 3 fair value measurements disclosures becomes effective for the Company’s interim reporting period ending September 30, 2011, and the Company does not expect that this guidance will have an impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows as it is disclosure-only in nature.
NOTE 2 — FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The Company’s financial assets and liabilities are measured and recorded at fair value, except for equity investments in privately-held companies. These equity investments are generally accounted for under the cost method of accounting and are periodically assessed for other-than-temporary impairment when an event or circumstance indicates that an other-than-temporary decline in value may have occurred. The Company’s non-financial assets, such as goodwill, intangible assets, and property, plant and equipment, are recorded at cost and are assessed for impairment when an event or circumstance indicates that an other-than-temporary decline in value may have occurred.
Fair Value Hierarchy.
The authoritative guidance for fair value measurements establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are described below:
|
Level 1
|
|
Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity has the ability to access.
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Valuations based on inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
|
A financial instrument’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
All of the Company’s financial instruments were classified within Level 1 or Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy as of
June 30, 2011
, because they were valued using quoted market prices, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. The types of instruments valued based on quoted market prices in active markets include money market funds, U.S. Government agency securities and U.S. Treasury securities. Such instruments are generally classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.
The types of instruments valued based on other observable inputs include U.S. Government agency securities, commercial paper, corporate debt securities, municipal securities and sovereign securities. The market inputs used to value these instruments generally consist of market yields, reported trades and broker/dealer quotes. Such instruments are generally classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
The principal market in which the Company executes its foreign currency contracts is the institutional market in an over-the-counter environment with a relatively high level of price transparency. The market participants usually are large commercial banks. The Company's foreign currency contracts’ valuation inputs are based on quoted prices and quoted pricing intervals from public data sources and do not involve management judgment. These contracts are typically classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
The types of instruments valued based on unobservable inputs included the auction rate securities that were held by the Company as of and prior to June 30, 2010. Such instruments were classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The Company estimated the fair value of these auction rate securities using a discounted cash flow model incorporating assumptions that market participants would use in their estimates of fair value. Some of these assumptions included estimates for interest rates, timing and amount of cash flows and expected holding periods of the auction rate securities.
59
Financial assets (excluding cash held in operating accounts and time deposits) and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of
June 30, 2011
were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets
for Identical
Assets (Level 1)
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|||||||||||
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
$
|
58,896
|
|
$
|
52,396
|
|
$
|
6,500
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
U.S. Government agency securities
|
320,183
|
|
320,183
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
38,957
|
|
—
|
|
38,957
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Corporate debt securities
|
875,385
|
|
—
|
|
875,385
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Money market and other
|
481,770
|
|
481,770
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Sovereign securities
|
32,086
|
|
14,696
|
|
17,390
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Total marketable securities and cash equivalents(1)
|
1,807,277
|
|
869,045
|
|
938,232
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Money market and other
|
1,806
|
|
1,806
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Mutual funds
|
126,227
|
|
95,971
|
|
30,256
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan total
|
128,033
|
|
97,777
|
|
30,256
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Derivative assets
|
1,970
|
|
—
|
|
1,970
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Total financial assets(1)
|
$
|
1,937,280
|
|
$
|
966,822
|
|
$
|
970,458
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Derivative liabilities
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Total financial liabilities
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
__________________
(1) Excludes cash of
$165.9 million
held in operating accounts and time deposits of
$65.4 million
as of
June 30, 2011
.
Financial assets (excluding cash held in operating accounts and time deposits) and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of
June 30, 2010
were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets
for Identical
Assets (Level 1)
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|||||||||||
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
$
|
42,293
|
|
$
|
35,194
|
|
$
|
7,099
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
U.S. Government agency securities
|
250,280
|
|
243,144
|
|
7,136
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
55,459
|
|
—
|
|
55,459
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Corporate debt securities
|
603,156
|
|
—
|
|
603,156
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Money market and other
|
334,674
|
|
334,663
|
|
11
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Sovereign securities
|
39,355
|
|
10,500
|
|
28,855
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Auction rate securities
|
16,825
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
16,825
|
|
|||||||
|
Total marketable securities and cash equivalents(1)
|
1,342,042
|
|
623,501
|
|
701,716
|
|
16,825
|
|
|||||||
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Money market and other
|
4
|
|
4
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Mutual funds
|
109,226
|
|
85,254
|
|
23,972
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan total
|
109,230
|
|
85,258
|
|
23,972
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Derivative assets
|
$
|
296
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Total financial assets(1)
|
$
|
1,451,568
|
|
$
|
708,759
|
|
$
|
725,984
|
|
$
|
16,825
|
|
|||
|
Derivative liabilities
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Total financial liabilities
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
__________________
(1) Excludes cash of
$153.6 million
held in operating accounts and time deposits of
$38.4 million
as of
June 30, 2010
.
60
Financial assets (excluding cash held in operating accounts and time deposits) and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis were presented in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as of
June 30, 2011
as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets
for Identical
Assets (Level 1)
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|||||||||||
|
Cash equivalents
|
$
|
514,162
|
|
$
|
487,780
|
|
$
|
26,382
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Marketable securities
|
1,293,115
|
|
381,265
|
|
911,850
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Other current assets
|
1,970
|
|
—
|
|
1,970
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Other non-current assets
|
128,033
|
|
97,777
|
|
30,256
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Total financial assets(1)
|
$
|
1,937,280
|
|
$
|
966,822
|
|
$
|
970,458
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Other current liabilities
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Total financial liabilities
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(2,127
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
__________________
(1) Excludes cash of
$165.9 million
held in operating accounts and time deposits of
$65.4 million
as of
June 30, 2011
.
Financial assets (excluding cash held in operating accounts and time deposits) and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis were presented in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as of
June 30, 2010
as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets
for Identical
Assets (Level 1)
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|||||||||||
|
Cash equivalents
|
$
|
363,623
|
|
$
|
343,524
|
|
$
|
20,099
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Marketable securities
|
978,419
|
|
279,977
|
|
681,617
|
|
16,825
|
|
|||||||
|
Other current assets
|
296
|
|
—
|
|
296
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Other non-current assets
|
109,230
|
|
85,258
|
|
23,972
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Total financial assets(1)
|
$
|
1,451,568
|
|
$
|
708,759
|
|
$
|
725,984
|
|
$
|
16,825
|
|
|||
|
Other current liabilities
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Total financial liabilities
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(5,824
|
)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
__________________
(1) Excludes cash of
$153.6 million
held in operating accounts and time deposits of
$38.4 million
as of
June 30, 2010
.
Changes in the Company's Level 3 securities for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
2011
|
2010
|
||||||
|
Beginning aggregate estimated fair value of Level 3 securities
|
$
|
16,825
|
|
$
|
40,584
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain included in income
|
—
|
|
66
|
|
|||
|
Net settlements
|
(16,825
|
)
|
(23,825
|
)
|
|||
|
Ending aggregate estimated fair value of Level 3 securities
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
16,825
|
|
|
61
NOTE 3 — FINANCIAL STATEMENT COMPONENTS
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Accounts receivable, net:
|
|||||||
|
Accounts receivable, gross
|
$
|
605,376
|
|
$
|
471,999
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
(22,106
|
)
|
(31,874
|
)
|
|||
|
$
|
583,270
|
|
$
|
440,125
|
|
||
|
Inventories, net:
|
|||||||
|
Customer service parts
|
$
|
148,466
|
|
$
|
131,951
|
|
|
|
Raw materials
|
235,605
|
|
123,301
|
|
|||
|
Work-in-process
|
131,804
|
|
95,641
|
|
|||
|
Finished goods
|
59,855
|
|
50,837
|
|
|||
|
$
|
575,730
|
|
$
|
401,730
|
|
||
|
Other current assets:
|
|||||||
|
Prepaid expense
|
$
|
61,796
|
|
$
|
39,121
|
|
|
|
Income tax related receivables
|
59,774
|
|
47,934
|
|
|||
|
Other current assets
|
25,508
|
|
43,989
|
|
|||
|
$
|
147,078
|
|
$
|
131,044
|
|
||
|
Land, property and equipment, net(1):
|
|||||||
|
Land
|
$
|
41,956
|
|
$
|
41,807
|
|
|
|
Buildings and leasehold improvements
|
234,173
|
|
224,403
|
|
|||
|
Machinery and equipment
|
447,772
|
|
443,351
|
|
|||
|
Office furniture and fixtures
|
19,645
|
|
23,345
|
|
|||
|
Construction in process
|
6,979
|
|
2,603
|
|
|||
|
750,525
|
|
735,509
|
|
||||
|
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(493,167
|
)
|
(498,757
|
)
|
|||
|
$
|
257,358
|
|
$
|
236,752
|
|
||
|
Other non-current assets:
|
|||||||
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan(2)
|
$
|
128,033
|
|
$
|
109,230
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets—long-term
|
173,788
|
|
244,927
|
|
|||
|
Other
|
26,274
|
|
35,340
|
|
|||
|
$
|
328,095
|
|
$
|
389,497
|
|
||
|
Other current liabilities:
|
|||||||
|
Warranty
|
$
|
41,528
|
|
$
|
21,109
|
|
|
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan(2)
|
128,088
|
|
109,964
|
|
|||
|
Compensation and benefits
|
186,761
|
|
158,482
|
|
|||
|
Income taxes payable
|
16,564
|
|
35,340
|
|
|||
|
Interest payable
|
8,769
|
|
8,769
|
|
|||
|
Accrued litigation costs
|
4,824
|
|
10,439
|
|
|||
|
Other accrued expenses
|
115,937
|
|
77,956
|
|
|||
|
$
|
502,471
|
|
$
|
422,059
|
|
||
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss):
|
|||||||
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
$
|
251
|
|
$
|
(27,701
|
)
|
|
62
|
Gains (losses) on cash flow hedging instruments, net of taxes (benefits) of $5 in 2011 and $(754) in 2010
|
8
|
|
(1,241
|
)
|
|||
|
Unrealized gains on investments, net of taxes of $2,258 in 2011 and $2,163 in 2010
|
3,909
|
|
3,562
|
|
|||
|
Unrealized losses of defined benefit pension plan, net of tax benefits of $(4,637) in 2011 and $(3,721) in 2010
|
(6,567
|
)
|
(5,923
|
)
|
|||
|
$
|
(2,399
|
)
|
$
|
(31,303
|
)
|
||
__________________
|
(1)
|
As of June 30,
2011
and
2010
, the net book value of property and equipment includes assets held for sale of
$2.3 million
and
$19.3 million
, respectively.
|
|
(2)
|
KLA-Tencor has a non-qualified deferred compensation plan whereby certain executives and non-employee directors may defer a portion of their compensation. Participants are credited with returns based on their allocation of their account balances among measurement funds. The Company controls the investment of these funds and the participants remain general creditors of KLA-Tencor. Distributions from the plan commence the quarter following a participant’s retirement or termination of employment, except in cases where such distributions are required to be delayed in order to avoid a prohibited distribution under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A. As of
June 30, 2011
, the Company had a deferred compensation plan related asset and liability included as a component of other non-current assets and other current liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Interest income and other, net:
|
|||||||||||
|
Interest income
|
$
|
15,513
|
|
|
$
|
17,512
|
|
$
|
27,157
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange gains (losses), net
|
(2,108
|
)
|
(5,009
|
)
|
5,375
|
|
|||||
|
Realized gains (losses) on sale of investments
|
2,479
|
|
|
4,021
|
|
(568
|
)
|
||||
|
Other
|
(11,820
|
)
|
(1)
|
15,008
|
|
(2)
|
(1,215
|
)
|
|||
|
$
|
4,064
|
|
|
$
|
31,532
|
|
$
|
30,749
|
|
||
__________________
|
(1)
|
Includes impairment charges of
$9.9 million
recorded during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
for equity investments in privately-held companies.
|
|
(2)
|
Includes a benefit of
$15.9 million
that the Company recorded upon expiration of a statute of limitations related to an uncertainty in the Company’s position with respect to a foreign transaction-based tax.
|
63
NOTE 4 — MARKETABLE SECURITIES
The amortized cost and fair value of marketable securities as of June 30,
2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
As of June 30, 2011 (In thousands)
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
|
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
|
Fair Value
|
|||||||||||
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
$
|
58,754
|
|
$
|
165
|
|
$
|
(23
|
)
|
$
|
58,896
|
|
|||
|
U.S. Government agency securities
|
319,375
|
|
931
|
|
(123
|
)
|
320,183
|
|
|||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
38,688
|
|
275
|
|
(6
|
)
|
38,957
|
|
|||||||
|
Corporate debt securities
|
870,591
|
|
5,162
|
|
(368
|
)
|
875,385
|
|
|||||||
|
Money market and other
|
481,770
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
481,770
|
|
|||||||
|
Sovereign securities
|
31,932
|
|
179
|
|
(25
|
)
|
32,086
|
|
|||||||
|
Subtotal
|
1,801,110
|
|
6,712
|
|
(545
|
)
|
1,807,277
|
|
|||||||
|
Add: Time deposits(1)
|
65,402
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
65,402
|
|
|||||||
|
Less: Cash equivalents
|
545,475
|
|
—
|
|
(2
|
)
|
545,473
|
|
|||||||
|
Marketable securities
|
$
|
1,321,037
|
|
$
|
6,712
|
|
$
|
(543
|
)
|
$
|
1,327,206
|
|
|||
|
As of June 30, 2010 (In thousands)
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
|
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
|
Fair Value
|
|||||||||||
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
$
|
42,182
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
$
|
42,293
|
|
|||
|
U.S. Government agency securities
|
249,182
|
|
1,108
|
|
(10
|
)
|
250,280
|
|
|||||||
|
Municipal securities
|
55,171
|
|
368
|
|
(80
|
)
|
55,459
|
|
|||||||
|
Corporate debt securities
|
599,118
|
|
5,314
|
|
(1,276
|
)
|
603,156
|
|
|||||||
|
Money market and other
|
334,674
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
334,674
|
|
|||||||
|
Sovereign securities
|
39,166
|
|
210
|
|
(21
|
)
|
39,355
|
|
|||||||
|
Auction rate securities
|
16,825
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
16,825
|
|
|||||||
|
Subtotal
|
1,336,318
|
|
7,112
|
|
(1,388
|
)
|
1,342,042
|
|
|||||||
|
Add: Time deposits(1)
|
38,407
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
38,407
|
|
|||||||
|
Less: Cash equivalents
|
376,316
|
|
7
|
|
—
|
|
376,323
|
|
|||||||
|
Marketable securities
|
$
|
998,409
|
|
$
|
7,105
|
|
$
|
(1,388
|
)
|
$
|
1,004,126
|
|
|||
__________________
(1) Time deposits excluded from fair value measurements.
64
KLA-Tencor’s investment portfolio consists of both corporate and government securities that have a maximum maturity of three years. The longer the duration of these securities, the more susceptible they are to changes in market interest rates and bond yields. As yields increase, those securities with a lower yield-at-cost show a mark-to-market unrealized loss. All unrealized losses are due to changes in interest rates and bond yields. The Company has the ability to realize the full value of all of these investments upon maturity. The following table summarizes the fair value and gross unrealized losses of the Company's investments that were in an unrealized loss position as of
June 30, 2011
:
|
(In thousands)
|
Fair Value
|
Gross
Unrealized
Losses(1)
|
|||||
|
U.S. Treasury securities
|
$
|
15,660
|
|
$
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
U.S. Government agency securities
|
63,345
|
|
(121
|
)
|
|||
|
Municipal securities
|
3,181
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|||
|
Corporate debt securities
|
137,990
|
|
(368
|
)
|
|||
|
Sovereign securities
|
7,542
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|||
|
Total
|
$
|
227,718
|
|
$
|
(543
|
)
|
|
__________________
|
(1)
|
Of the total gross unrealized losses, there were no amounts that, as of
June 30, 2011
, had been in a continuous loss position for
12
months or more.
|
The contractual maturities of securities classified as available-for-sale as of
June 30, 2011
, regardless of the consolidated balance sheet classification, were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Amortized
Cost
|
Fair Value
|
|||||
|
Due within one year
|
$
|
338,240
|
|
$
|
339,968
|
|
|
|
Due after one year through three years
|
982,797
|
|
987,238
|
|
|||
|
$
|
1,321,037
|
|
$
|
1,327,206
|
|
||
Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities, because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties. Net realized gains for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
June 30, 2010
were
$2.5 million
and
$4.0 million
, respectively. Net realized losses for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2009
were
$0.6 million
.
During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2009 and 2010, the Company’s investment portfolio included auction rate securities, which were investments with contractual maturities generally between
20
to
30
years. They are usually found in the form of municipal securities, preferred stock, a pool of student loans, or collateralized debt obligations whose interest rates are reset. The reset typically occurs every
seven to forty-nine days
, through an auction process. At the end of each reset period, investors can sell or continue to hold the securities at par. The auction rate securities that were held by the Company were backed by student loans and were collateralized, insured and guaranteed by the United States Federal Department of Education. In addition, all auction rate securities that were held by the Company were rated by the major independent rating agencies as either AAA or Aaa. In February 2008, because sell orders exceeded buy orders, auctions failed for approximately
$48.2 million
in par value of municipal auction rate securities that were then held by the Company. These failures were not believed to be a credit issue, but rather caused by a lack of liquidity. The funds associated with these failed auctions might not have been accessible until the issuer called the security, a successful auction occurred, a buyer was found outside of the auction process, or the security matured. By letter dated August 8, 2008, the Company received notification from UBS AG (“UBS”), in connection with a settlement entered into between UBS and certain regulatory agencies, offering to repurchase all of the Company’s auction rate security holdings at par value. The Company formally accepted the settlement offer and entered into a repurchase agreement (“Agreement”) with UBS on November 11, 2008 (“Acceptance Date”). By accepting the Agreement, the Company (1) received the right (“Put Option”) to sell its auction rate securities at par value to UBS between June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2012 and (2) gave UBS the right to purchase the auction rate securities from the Company any time after the Acceptance Date as long as the Company received the par value. The Company accounted for the Put Option as a freestanding financial instrument, and during the three months ended December 31, 2008, it made an election to transfer these auction rate securities from available for sale to trading securities. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010,
$23.9 million
of the auction rate securities were called at par by the issuers. The Put Option was exercised on June 30, 2010 to sell all
$16.8 million
of the Company's remaining auction rate securities at par value and was subsequently settled in July 2010.
65
NOTE 5 — BUSINESS COMBINATION
The Company accounts for business combinations using the purchase method of accounting. Consideration includes the cash paid and the value of options assumed, less any cash acquired, and excludes contingent employee compensation payable in cash.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, the Company completed its acquisition of the Microelectronic Inspection Equipment business unit (“MIE business unit”) of Vistec Semiconductor Systems for net cash consideration of
$141.4 million
. The acquired MIE business unit is a provider of mask registration measurement tools, scanning electron microscopy (“SEM”) based tools for mask critical dimension measurement and macro defect inspection systems.
The following table represents the final purchase price allocation and summarizes the aggregate estimated fair values of the net assets acquired on the closing date of the acquisition of the MIE business unit:
|
(In thousands)
|
Final
Purchase
Price Allocation
|
||
|
Cash
|
$
|
14,219
|
|
|
Current assets
|
60,094
|
|
|
|
Intangibles:
|
|||
|
Existing technology
|
39,800
|
|
|
|
Patents
|
18,200
|
|
|
|
Trade name/Trademarks
|
4,800
|
|
|
|
Customer relationships
|
19,300
|
|
|
|
In-process R&D (“IPR&D”)
|
8,600
|
|
|
|
Backlog
|
6,750
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets
|
9,950
|
|
|
|
Non-current assets
|
2,749
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
33,071
|
|
|
|
Liabilities assumed
|
(61,915
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
155,618
|
|
|
|
Cash consideration – paid
|
$
|
155,618
|
|
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired. The
$33.1 million
of goodwill is assigned to the defect inspection reporting unit, which is not expected to be deductible for tax purposes. This acquisition provided the Company with a line of mask registration measurement tools to complement the Company’s previously existing mask inspection products. In addition, through the acquisition, the Company acquired a provider of SEM-based tools for mask critical dimension measurement. Other technologies of the MIE business unit acquired by the Company in the transaction included macro defect inspection systems, overlay measurement systems for microelectromechanical systems (“MEMS”) applications and software packages for defect classification and data analysis.
The fair value of the purchased IPR&D and identified intangibles was determined using the income approach, which discounts expected future cash flows from projects to their net present value. Each project was analyzed to determine the technological innovations included; the utilization of core technology; the complexity, cost and time to complete development; any alternative future use or current technological feasibility; and the stage of completion. Future cash flows were estimated, taking into account the expected life cycles of the products and the underlying technology, relevant market sizes and industry trends. The Company determined a discount rate for each project based on the relative risks inherent in the project’s development horizon, the estimated costs of development, and the level of technological change in the project and the industry, among other factors.
The Company expensed IPR&D of
$8.6 million
upon the completion of the acquisition in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 in connection with acquired intellectual property for which technological feasibility had not been established and no future alternative uses existed.
66
The results of operations of the acquired MIE business unit are included in the accompanying Consolidated Statement of Operations from the closing date of the acquisition on September 30, 2008. Pro forma earnings information had not been presented because the effect of the acquisition of the MIE business unit was not material to the Company’s results of operations, balance sheet or statement of cash flows.
NOTE 6 — GOODWILL AND PURCHASED INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill
The following table presents goodwill balances as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
(In thousands)
|
As of
June 30, 2011 |
As of
June 30, 2010 |
|||||
|
Gross goodwill balance
|
$
|
604,742
|
|
$
|
604,592
|
|
|
|
Accumulated impairment losses
|
(276,586
|
)
|
(276,586
|
)
|
|||
|
Net goodwill balance
|
$
|
328,156
|
|
$
|
328,006
|
|
|
Adjustments to goodwill during the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
and
2010
resulted primarily from foreign currency translation adjustments.
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in each business combination. The Company performs an annual evaluation of goodwill as of November 30 each year, as well as upon the occurrence of significant events or circumstances that impact the valuation of goodwill. The Company completed its annual evaluation of the goodwill by reporting unit during the three months ended December 31,
2010
and
2009
and concluded in each case that there was no impairment, because the fair value of each of the Company's reporting units was substantially in excess of its estimated carrying value. There have been no significant events or circumstances affecting the valuation of goodwill subsequent to the impairment test performed in the three months ended December 31,
2010
. The next annual evaluation of the goodwill by reporting unit will be performed in the three months ending December 31,
2011
.
During the three months ended December 31, 2008, the Company completed its annual evaluation of the goodwill by reporting unit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 and determined that the goodwill related to its Metrology reporting unit was impaired as a result of the global economic downturn, reductions to the Company’s revenue, operating income and cash flow forecasts, and a significant reduction in the Company’s market capitalization. As a result, the Company recorded an impairment charge of
$272.1 million
, which represented the entire goodwill amount related to the Metrology reporting unit, during the three months ended December 31, 2008. The Company’s assessment of goodwill impairment indicated that the fair values of the Company’s other reporting units exceeded their estimated carrying values, and therefore goodwill in those reporting units was not impaired.
Fair value of a reporting unit is determined by using a weighted combination of two market-based approaches and an income approach, as this combination is deemed to be the most indicative of the Company’s fair value in an orderly transaction between market participants and is consistent in principle with the methodology used for goodwill evaluation in the prior year. Under the market-based approach, the Company utilizes information regarding the Company as well as publicly available industry information to determine earnings multiples and sales multiples that are used to value the Company’s reporting units. The Company assigns an equal weighting to the discounted cash flow. Under the income approach, the Company determines fair value based on estimated future cash flows of each reporting unit, discounted by an estimated weighted-average cost of capital, which reflects the overall level of inherent risk of a reporting unit and the rate of return an outside investor would expect to earn. Determining the fair value of a reporting unit is judgmental in nature and requires the use of significant estimates and assumptions, including revenue growth rates, operating margins, discount rates and future market conditions, among others.
67
Purchased Intangible Assets
The components of purchased intangible assets as of June 30,
2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
As of June 30, 2011
|
As of June 30, 2010
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Category
|
Range of
Useful Lives
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
Net
Amount
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
Net
Amount
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Existing technology
|
4-7 years
|
$
|
134,561
|
|
$
|
94,172
|
|
$
|
40,389
|
|
$
|
133,066
|
|
$
|
75,524
|
|
$
|
57,542
|
|
||||||
|
Patents
|
6-13 years
|
57,648
|
|
40,591
|
|
17,057
|
|
57,648
|
|
34,217
|
|
23,431
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Trade name/Trademark
|
4-10 years
|
19,893
|
|
12,907
|
|
6,986
|
|
19,893
|
|
11,130
|
|
8,763
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Customer relationships
|
6-7 years
|
54,823
|
|
33,565
|
|
21,258
|
|
54,823
|
|
27,606
|
|
27,217
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Other
|
0-1 year
|
16,200
|
|
15,988
|
|
212
|
|
16,200
|
|
15,817
|
|
383
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
283,125
|
|
$
|
197,223
|
|
$
|
85,902
|
|
$
|
281,630
|
|
$
|
164,294
|
|
$
|
117,336
|
|
|||||||
Intangible assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset or asset group may not be recoverable. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008, the Company identified a certain business unit as held for sale. This business unit was subsequently sold during the three months ended December 31, 2009, and the Company recognized a gain of
$0.8 million
in connection with the sale.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, the economic conditions that affect the Company’s industry deteriorated, which led the Company’s customers to scale back their production operations and reduce their capital expenditures. At that time, industry analysts expected demand for semiconductor capital equipment to continue to remain weak until macroeconomic conditions improved. In addition, the Company experienced a significant decline in its stock price, resulting in a significant reduction in the Company’s market capitalization. These factors were taken into account as the Company performed an assessment of its purchased intangible assets during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009 to test for recoverability in accordance with the authoritative guidance on impairment of long-lived assets. The assessment of recoverability is based on management’s estimates. Based on the assessment, the Company recorded an intangible asset impairment charge of
$162.8 million
, of which
$73.1 million
related to existing technology,
$26.3 million
to patents,
$38.1 million
to customer relationships,
$16.6 million
to trademarks and
$8.7 million
to other intangible assets.
For the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
,
2010
and
2009
, amortization expense for other intangible assets was
$32.9 million
,
$33.8 million
and
$69.3 million
, respectively. Based on the intangible assets recorded as of
June 30, 2011
, and assuming no subsequent additions to or impairment of the underlying assets, the remaining estimated annual amortization expense is expected to be as follows:
|
Year ending June 30:
|
Amortization
(In thousands)
|
||
|
2012
|
$
|
30,230
|
|
|
2013
|
20,957
|
|
|
|
2014
|
15,537
|
|
|
|
2015
|
12,771
|
|
|
|
2016
|
5,582
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
825
|
|
|
|
Total
|
$
|
85,902
|
|
NOTE 7 — LONG-TERM DEBT
In April 2008, the Company issued
$750 million
aggregate principal amount of
6.90%
senior, unsecured long-term debt due in
2018
with an effective interest rate of
7.00%
. The discount on the debt amounted to
$5.4 million
and is being amortized over the life of the debt using the straight-line method as opposed to the interest method due to immateriality. Interest is payable semi-annually on November 1 and May 1. The debt indenture includes covenants that limit the Company’s ability to grant liens on its facilities and to enter into sale and leaseback transactions, subject to significant allowances under which certain sale and leaseback transactions are not restricted. The Company was in compliance with all of its covenants as of
June 30, 2011
.
68
In certain circumstances involving a change of control followed by a downgrade of the rating of the Company’s senior notes, the Company will be required to make an offer to repurchase the senior notes at a purchase price equal to
101%
of the aggregate principal amount of the notes, plus accrued and unpaid interest. The Company’s ability to repurchase the senior notes in such event may be limited by law, by the indenture associated with the senior notes, by the Company’s then-available financial resources or by the terms of other agreements to which the Company may be party at such time. If the Company fails to repurchase the senior notes as required by the indenture, it would constitute an event of default under the indenture governing the senior notes which, in turn, may also constitute an event of default under other obligations.
Based on the trading prices of the debt as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, the fair value of the debt as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
was
$863.5 million
and
$834.4 million
, respectively.
NOTE 8 — STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
Equity Incentive Program
Under the Company’s current equity incentive program, the Company issues equity awards from its 2004 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2004 Plan”), which provides for the grant of options to purchase shares of its common stock, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock units, performance shares, performance units and deferred stock units to its employees, consultants and members of its Board of Directors. The 2004 Plan permits the issuance of up to
32.0 million
shares of common stock. Any 2004 Plan awards of restricted stock units, performance shares, performance units or deferred stock units with a per share or unit purchase price lower than
100%
of fair market value on the grant date are counted against the total number of shares issuable under the 2004 Plan as
1.8
shares for every one share subject thereto.
The following table summarizes the combined activity under the equity incentive plans for the indicated periods:
|
(In thousands)
|
Available
For Grant
|
|
|
Balances as of June 30, 2008(1)
|
9,245
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted(2)
|
(3,996
|
)
|
|
Restricted stock units canceled (2)
|
1,117
|
|
|
Restricted stock units withheld for taxes(2)(3)
|
695
|
|
|
Options canceled/expired/forfeited
|
2,414
|
|
|
Plan shares expired(4)
|
(1,773
|
)
|
|
Balances as of June 30, 2009(1)
|
7,702
|
|
|
Shares added to 2004 Plan
|
11,000
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted(2)
|
(5,213
|
)
|
|
Restricted stock units canceled(2)
|
1,140
|
|
|
Restricted stock units withheld for taxes(2)(3)
|
244
|
|
|
Options canceled/expired/forfeited
|
1,161
|
|
|
Plan shares expired(4)
|
(872
|
)
|
|
Balances as of June 30, 2010(1)
|
15,162
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted(2)(5)
|
(4,062
|
)
|
|
Restricted stock units canceled(2)
|
367
|
|
|
Options canceled/expired/forfeited
|
1,141
|
|
|
Plan shares expired(4)
|
(1,054
|
)
|
|
Balances as of June 30, 2011(1)
|
11,554
|
|
__________________
|
(1)
|
Includes shares available for issuance under the 2004 Plan, as well as under the Company’s 1998 Outside Director Option Plan (the “Outside Director Plan”), which only permits the issuance of stock options to the Company’s non-employee members of the Board of Directors. As of
June 30, 2011
,
1.6 million
shares were available for grant under the Outside Director Plan.
|
|
(2)
|
The number of restricted stock units provided in this row reflects the application of the
1.8
x multiple described above.
|
|
(3)
|
Effective November 4, 2009, any shares withheld by the Company after such date in satisfaction of applicable withholding taxes upon the issuance, vesting or settlement of equity awards under the 2004 Plan will no longer be available for future issuance under the 2004 Plan.
|
69
|
(4)
|
Represents the portion of shares listed as “Options canceled/expired/forfeited” above that were issued under the Company’s equity incentive plans other than the 2004 Plan or the Outside Director Plan. Because the Company is only currently authorized to issue equity awards under the 2004 Plan and the Outside Director Plan, any equity awards that are canceled, expire or are forfeited under any other Company equity incentive plan do not result in additional shares being available to the Company for future grant.
|
|
(5)
|
Includes
0.3 million
restricted stock units granted to senior management during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 with performance-based vesting criteria (in addition to service-based vesting criteria for any of such restricted stock units that are deemed to have been earned). As of
June 30, 2011
, it had not yet been determined the extent to which (if at all) the performance-based vesting criteria of such restricted stock units had been satisfied. Therefore, this line item includes all such performance-based restricted stock units, reported at the maximum possible number of shares that may ultimately be issuable under such restricted stock units if all applicable performance-based and service-based criteria are fully satisfied.
|
Except for options granted to non-employee Board members as part of their regular compensation package for service through the end of the first quarter of fiscal year 2008, the Company has granted only restricted stock units under its equity incentive program since September 2006. For the preceding several years until June 30, 2006, stock options were granted at the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant (except for the previously disclosed retroactively priced options which were granted primarily prior to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002), generally with a vesting period of five years and an exercise period not to exceed seven years (ten years for options granted prior to July 1, 2005) from the date of issuance. Restricted stock units may be granted with varying criteria such as service-based and/or performance-based vesting.
The fair value of stock-based awards is measured at the grant date and is recognized as expense over the employee’s requisite service period. The fair value is determined using a Black-Scholes valuation model for purchase rights under the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan and using the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the grant date for restricted stock units.
The following table shows pre-tax stock-based compensation expense for the indicated periods:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Stock-based compensation expense by:
|
|||||||||||
|
Costs of revenues
|
$
|
13,935
|
|
$
|
14,275
|
|
$
|
19,932
|
|
||
|
Engineering, research and development
|
24,539
|
|
27,289
|
|
33,127
|
|
|||||
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
42,956
|
|
44,418
|
|
52,476
|
|
|||||
|
Total stock-based compensation expense
|
$
|
81,430
|
|
$
|
85,982
|
|
$
|
105,535
|
|
||
The following table shows stock-based compensation capitalized as inventory as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
(In thousands)
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
||||||
|
Inventory
|
$
|
6,701
|
|
$
|
6,687
|
|
|
Stock Options
The following table summarizes the activity and weighted-average exercise price for stock options under all plans for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
:
|
Stock Options
|
Shares
(In thousands)
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
||||
|
Outstanding stock options as of June 30, 2010
|
11,358
|
|
$
|
43.72
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
(2,542
|
)
|
$
|
37.17
|
|
|
|
Cancelled/expired/forfeited
|
(1,141
|
)
|
$
|
46.73
|
|
|
|
Outstanding stock options as of June 30, 2011
|
7,675
|
|
$
|
45.38
|
|
|
|
Vested and exercisable as of June 30, 2011
|
7,672
|
|
$
|
45.38
|
|
|
70
The Company has not issued any stock options since November 1, 2007. The weighted-average remaining contractual terms for total options outstanding under all plans and for total options vested and exercisable under all plans as of
June 30, 2011
were each
2.1
years. The aggregate intrinsic values for total options outstanding under all plans and for total options vested and exercisable under all plans as of
June 30, 2011
were each
$7.4 million
.
The authoritative guidance on stock-based compensation permits companies to select the option-pricing model used to estimate the fair value of their stock-based compensation awards. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the input of assumptions, including the option’s expected life and the expected price volatility of the underlying stock. The expected stock price volatility assumption was based on the market-based implied volatility from traded options of the Company’s common stock.
The following table shows the total intrinsic value of options exercised, total cash received from employees as a result of employee stock option exercises, and tax benefits realized by the Company in connection with these stock option exercises for the indicated periods:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||
|
Total intrinsic value of options exercised
|
$
|
19,408
|
|
$
|
1,217
|
|
$
|
10,647
|
|
||
|
Total cash received from employees as a result of employee stock option exercises
|
$
|
94,488
|
|
$
|
15,154
|
|
$
|
9,804
|
|
||
|
Tax benefits realized in connection with these exercises
|
$
|
6,653
|
|
$
|
447
|
|
$
|
4,482
|
|
||
As of
June 30, 2011
, the unrecognized stock-based compensation balance related to stock options was
$0.1 million
and will be recognized over an estimated weighted-average amortization period of
0.8
years.
The Company settles employee stock option exercises with newly issued common shares except in certain tax jurisdictions where settling such exercises with treasury shares provides the Company or one of its subsidiaries with a tax benefit.
Restricted Stock Units
The following table shows the applicable number of restricted stock units and weighted-average grant-date fair value after estimated forfeitures for restricted stock units granted, vested and released, withheld for taxes, and forfeited during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
and restricted stock units outstanding as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
Restricted Stock Units
|
Shares
(in thousands) (1)
|
Weighted-Average
Grant-Date
Fair Value
|
||||
|
Outstanding restricted stock units as of June 30, 2010
|
6,470
|
|
$
|
22.52
|
|
|
|
Granted(2)
|
2,256
|
|
$
|
20.35
|
|
|
|
Vested and released
|
(1,337
|
)
|
$
|
24.12
|
|
|
|
Withheld for taxes
|
(645
|
)
|
$
|
24.60
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
(204
|
)
|
$
|
21.13
|
|
|
|
Outstanding restricted stock units as of June 30, 2011(2)
|
6,540
|
|
$
|
21.28
|
|
|
__________________
|
(1)
|
Share numbers reflect actual shares subject to awarded restricted stock units. Under the terms of the 2004 Plan, each of the share numbers presented in this column is multiplied by
1.8
to calculate the impact on the share reserve under the 2004 Plan.
|
|
(2)
|
Includes
0.3 million
restricted stock units granted to senior management during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 with performance-based vesting criteria (in addition to service-based vesting criteria for any of such restricted stock units that are deemed to have been earned). As of
June 30, 2011
, it had not yet been determined the extent to which (if at all) the performance-based vesting criteria of such restricted stock units had been satisfied. Therefore, this line item includes all such performance-based restricted stock units, reported at the maximum possible number of shares that may ultimately be issuable under such restricted stock units if all applicable performance-based and service-based criteria are fully satisfied.
|
71
The restricted stock units granted by the Company since the beginning of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007 generally vest in two equal installments on the second and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant. Prior to the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, the restricted stock units granted by the Company generally vested in two equal installments over four or five years from the date of the grant. The value of the restricted stock units is based on the closing market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of award. The restricted stock units have been awarded under the Company’s 2004 Plan, and each unit will entitle the recipient to one share of common stock when the applicable vesting requirements for that unit are satisfied. However, for each share actually issued under the awarded restricted stock units, the share reserve under the 2004 Plan will be reduced by
1.8
shares, as provided under the terms of the 2004 Plan.
The following table shows the grant-date fair value after estimated forfeitures, weighted-average grant date fair value per unit, and tax benefits realized by the Company in connection with vested and released restricted stock units for the indicated periods:
|
(In thousands, except for weighted-average grant date fair value)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||
|
Grant-date fair value after estimated forfeitures
|
$
|
45,915
|
|
$
|
64,230
|
|
$
|
32,480
|
|
||
|
Weighted-average grant date fair value per unit
|
$
|
20.35
|
|
$
|
22.18
|
|
$
|
14.63
|
|
||
|
Tax benefits realized in connection with vested and released restricted stock units
|
$
|
23,302
|
|
$
|
14,181
|
|
$
|
13,270
|
|
||
As of
June 30, 2011
, the unrecognized stock-based compensation expense balance related to restricted stock units was
$99.3 million
and will be recognized over an estimated weighted-average amortization period of
2.2
years.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
KLA-Tencor’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) provides that eligible employees may contribute up to
10%
of their eligible earnings toward the semi-annual purchase of KLA-Tencor’s common stock. The ESPP is qualified under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. The employee’s purchase price is derived from a formula based on the closing price of the common stock on the first day of the offering period versus the closing price on the date of purchase (or, if not a trading day, on the immediately preceding trading day).
During the quarter ended December 31, 2008, the Company’s Board of Directors, as part of the Company’s ongoing efforts to reduce operating expenses, approved amendments to the ESPP so as to, among other things, reduce each offering period under the ESPP (and therefore the length of the look-back period) from
24
months to
6
months. This change became effective January 1, 2009, such that the offering period that began on January 1, 2009 had a duration of six months, and the purchase price with respect to such offering period was
85%
of the lesser of (i) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock at the commencement of the six-month offering period or (ii) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the purchase date.
During the quarter ended March 31, 2009, the Company’s Board of Directors approved further amendments to the ESPP that (a) eliminated the look-back feature (i.e., the reference to the fair market value of the Company’s common stock at the commencement of the applicable six-month offering period) and (b) reduced the purchase price discount from
15%
to
5%
. These changes were effective July 1, 2009, such that the purchase price with respect to the six-month offering period that began on July 1, 2009 was
95%
of the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the purchase date, December 31, 2009.
During the quarter ended December 31, 2009, in response to improvements in the business conditions within the industries that the Company serves, the Company’s Board of Directors approved amendments to the ESPP that (a) reinstated the six-month look-back feature and (b) increased the purchase price discount from
5%
to
15%
. These changes became effective January 1, 2010, such that the purchase price with respect to each offering period beginning on or after such date will, until further amended, be
85%
of the lesser of (i) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock at the commencement of the applicable six-month offering period or (ii) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the purchase date.
72
The Company estimates the fair value of purchase rights under the ESPP using a Black-Scholes valuation model. The fair value of each purchase right under the ESPP was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option valuation model and the straight-line attribution approach with the following weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||
|
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||
|
Stock purchase plan:
|
||||||||
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
38.0
|
%
|
35.0
|
%
|
41.0
|
%
|
||
|
Risk free interest rate
|
0.2
|
%
|
0.2
|
%
|
1.8
|
%
|
||
|
Dividend yield
|
3.1
|
%
|
1.6
|
%
|
1.4
|
%
|
||
|
Expected life of options (in years)
|
0.50
|
|
0.50
|
|
1.30
|
|
||
The following table shows total cash received from employees for the issuance of shares under the ESPP, the number of shares purchased by employees through the ESPP, the tax benefits realized by the Company in connection with the disqualifying dispositions of shares purchased under the ESPP, and the weighted-average fair value per share:
|
(In thousands, except for weighted-average fair value per share)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||
|
Total cash received from employees for the issuance of shares under the ESPP
|
$
|
30,085
|
|
$
|
20,714
|
|
$
|
30,306
|
|
||
|
Number of shares purchased by employees through the ESPP
|
1,123
|
|
758
|
|
1,615
|
|
|||||
|
Tax benefits realized in connection with the disqualifying dispositions of shares purchased under the ESPP
|
$
|
2,194
|
|
$
|
994
|
|
$
|
1,612
|
|
||
|
Weighted-average fair value per share based on Black-Scholes model
|
$
|
7.41
|
|
$
|
8.51
|
|
$
|
11.06
|
|
||
The ESPP shares are replenished annually on the first day of each fiscal year by virtue of an evergreen provision. The provision allows for share replenishment equal to the lesser of
2.0 million
shares or the number of shares which KLA-Tencor estimates will be required to be issued under the ESPP during the forthcoming fiscal year. During each of the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
,
2010
and
2009
,
2.0 million
additional shares were reserved under the ESPP. As of
June 30, 2011
, a total of
3.5 million
shares were reserved and available for issuance under the ESPP, and no additional shares have been added to the ESPP with respect to the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
.
Executive Severance and Consulting Agreement
During August 2008, the Company announced that, effective January 1, 2009, John H. Kispert, the Company’s former President and Chief Operating Officer, would cease to be an employee of the Company. In accordance with the terms of a Severance and Consulting Agreement entered into between the Company and Mr. Kispert dated August 28, 2008, Mr. Kispert received, in addition to certain cash payments and benefits, the following benefits related to his outstanding equity awards: (i) accelerated, pro-rated vesting of the unvested portion (as of the date that his employment with the Company terminated) of all of his outstanding restricted stock units, such that a percentage of the unvested portion of each such restricted stock unit grant, representing the portion of the entire service vesting period under such grant that had been served by Mr. Kispert as of the date that he ceased to be an employee of the Company, was accelerated; (ii) the acceleration of the delivery of all restricted stock units for which vesting was accelerated in accordance with the provisions of the Severance and Consulting Agreement; and (iii) the extension of the post-termination exercise period of each of Mr. Kispert’s stock options so that each such option remained exercisable for twelve months following the date Mr. Kispert ceased to be an employee of the Company, but in no event beyond the original term of the award. In connection with the stock-related benefits agreed to under such agreement, the Company recorded an additional non-cash, stock-based compensation charge of approximately
$4.7 million
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, which was included as a component of selling, general and administrative expense.
73
NOTE 9 — STOCK REPURCHASE PROGRAM
Since July 1997, the Board of Directors has authorized the Company to systematically repurchase in the open market up to
72.8 million
shares of its common stock under a repurchase program, including
10.0 million
shares authorized in February 2011. This program was put into place to reduce the dilution from KLA-Tencor’s equity incentive plans and employee stock purchase plan, and to return excess cash to the Company’s stockholders. Subject to market conditions, applicable legal requirements and other factors, the repurchases will be made from time to time in the open market in compliance with applicable securities laws, including the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules promulgated thereunder such as Rule 10b-18. In October 2008, the Company suspended its stock repurchase program, and the Company subsequently restarted the program in February 2010. As of
June 30, 2011
,
9.0 million
shares were available for repurchase under the Company’s repurchase program.
Share repurchases for the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
||||||
|
Number of shares of common stock repurchased
|
6,190
|
|
4,625
|
|
|||
|
Total cost of repurchases
|
$
|
232,924
|
|
$
|
140,910
|
|
|
The Company had shares issued and outstanding of
244.3 million
and
167.1 million
, respectively, as of
June 30, 2011
. As of
June 30, 2010
, shares issued and outstanding were
239.1 million
and
168.0 million
, respectively. The difference between shares issued and outstanding is related to shares repurchased under various repurchase programs. As of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
,
$2.7 million
and
$4.6 million
, respectively, of the above total cost of repurchase amount remained unpaid and is recorded in other current liabilities.
NOTE 10 — NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
Basic net income (loss) per share is calculated by dividing net income (loss) available to common stockholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income (loss) per share is calculated by using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period, increased to include the number of additional shares of common stock that would have been outstanding if the shares of common stock underlying the Company’s outstanding dilutive stock options and restricted stock units had been issued. The dilutive effect of outstanding options and restricted stock units is reflected in diluted earnings per share by application of the treasury stock method. Under the treasury stock method, the amount the employee must pay for exercising stock options, the amount of compensation cost for future service that the Company has not yet recognized, and the amount of tax benefits that would be recorded in additional paid-in capital when the award becomes deductible are assumed to be used to repurchase shares. The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted net income (loss) per share:
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||
|
Numerator:
|
|||||||||||
|
Net income (loss)
|
$
|
794,488
|
|
$
|
212,300
|
|
$
|
(523,368
|
)
|
||
|
Denominator:
|
|||||||||||
|
Weighted-average shares-basic, excluding unvested restricted stock units
|
167,261
|
|
170,652
|
|
170,253
|
|
|||||
|
Effect of dilutive options and restricted stock
|
3,091
|
|
2,382
|
|
—
|
|
|||||
|
Weighted-average shares-diluted
|
170,352
|
|
173,034
|
|
170,253
|
|
|||||
|
Basic net income (loss) per share
|
$
|
4.75
|
|
$
|
1.24
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
||
|
Diluted net income (loss) per share
|
$
|
4.66
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
$
|
(3.07
|
)
|
||
|
Anti-dilutive securities excluded from the computation of diluted net income (loss) per share
|
8,003
|
|
11,109
|
|
18,444
|
|
|||||
The total amount of dividends paid during the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
were
$167.4 million
,
$102.4 million
and
$102.1 million
, respectively. The increase in the amount of dividends paid during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
reflects an increase during the first quarter of that year to the level of the Company's quarterly dividend from
$0.15
to
$0.25
per share.
74
As discussed in Note 20, “Subsequent Events,” on July 12, 2011, the Company announced that its Board of Directors had authorized a further increase in the level of the Company's quarterly dividend from
$0.25
to
$0.35
per share. Accordingly, on
August 4, 2011
, the Company declared a quarterly cash dividend of
$0.35
per share on the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, to be paid on
September 1, 2011
to stockholders of record on
August 15, 2011
.
NOTE 11 — EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS
KLA-Tencor has a profit sharing program for eligible employees, which distributes, on a quarterly basis, a percentage of the Company’s pre-tax profits. In addition, the Company has an employee savings plan that qualifies as a deferred salary arrangement under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Through March 31, 2011, the Company matched a portion of each participating eligible employee's 401(k) contribution equal to
50%
of the first
$6,000
of the employee’s contribution (i.e., a maximum of
$3,000
) during each fiscal year. The Company's Board of Directors approved an amendment to the Company's 401(k) plan effective April 1, 2011 to increase the employer match amount to
50%
of the first
$8,000
of an eligible employee's contribution (i.e., a maximum of
$4,000
) during each fiscal year.
The total expenses under the profit sharing and 401(k) programs aggregated
$11.6 million
,
$6.4 million
and
$7.9 million
in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively. The Company has no defined benefit plans in the United States. In addition to the profit sharing plan and the United States 401(k), several of the Company's foreign subsidiaries have retirement plans for their full-time employees, several of which are defined benefit plans. Consistent with the requirements of local law, the Company deposits funds for certain of these plans with insurance companies, with third-party trustees or into government-managed accounts and/or accrues for the unfunded portion of the obligation. The assumptions used in calculating the obligation for the foreign plans depend on the local economic environment.
The Company applies authoritative guidance that requires an employer to recognize the funded status of each of its defined pension and post-retirement benefit plans as a net asset or liability in its statement of financial position with an offsetting amount in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Additionally, the authoritative guidance requires an employer to measure the funded status of each of its plans as of the date of its year-end statement of financial position. The benefit obligations and related assets under the Company’s plans have been measured as of June 30,
2011
and
2010
.
75
Summary data relating to the Company's foreign defined benefit pension plans, including key weighted-average assumptions used is provided in the following tables:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Change in projected benefit obligation
|
|||||||
|
Projected benefit obligation as of the beginning of the fiscal year
|
$
|
46,344
|
|
$
|
33,388
|
|
|
|
Service cost, including plan participant contributions
|
3,184
|
|
2,249
|
|
|||
|
Interest cost
|
1,270
|
|
1,020
|
|
|||
|
Contributions by plan participants
|
126
|
|
111
|
|
|||
|
Adjustment
|
9
|
|
5,059
|
|
|||
|
Actuarial loss
|
1,363
|
|
4,721
|
|
|||
|
Benefit payments
|
(1,357
|
)
|
(557
|
)
|
|||
|
Acquisitions
|
—
|
|
551
|
|
|||
|
Transfer in/(out)
|
—
|
|
(417
|
)
|
|||
|
Foreign currency exchange rate changes
|
5,871
|
|
219
|
|
|||
|
Projected benefit obligation as of the end of the fiscal year
|
$
|
56,810
|
|
$
|
46,344
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Change in fair value of plan assets
|
|||||||
|
Fair value of plan assets as of the beginning of the fiscal year
|
$
|
8,692
|
|
$
|
8,139
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
78
|
|
86
|
|
|||
|
Employer contributions
|
2,024
|
|
1,045
|
|
|||
|
Benefit and expense payments
|
(1,010
|
)
|
(290
|
)
|
|||
|
Acquisitions
|
—
|
|
169
|
|
|||
|
Transfer in/(out)
|
—
|
|
(160
|
)
|
|||
|
Foreign currency exchange rate changes
|
1,251
|
|
(297
|
)
|
|||
|
Fair value of plan assets as of the end of fiscal the year
|
$
|
11,035
|
|
$
|
8,692
|
|
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Funded status
|
|||||||
|
Ending funded status
|
$
|
(45,775
|
)
|
$
|
(37,652
|
)
|
|
|
Net amount recognized
|
$
|
(45,775
|
)
|
$
|
(37,652
|
)
|
|
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Plans with accumulated benefit obligations in excess of plan assets
|
|||||||
|
Accumulated benefit obligation
|
$
|
39,748
|
|
$
|
32,457
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation
|
$
|
56,810
|
|
$
|
46,344
|
|
|
|
Plan assets at fair value
|
$
|
11,035
|
|
$
|
8,692
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||
|
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||
|
Weighted-average assumptions
|
|||||
|
Discount rate
|
1.8%-5.5%
|
1.8%-4.9%
|
2.0%-6.3%
|
||
|
Expected return on assets
|
1.8%-4.5%
|
1.8%-4.5%
|
1.8%-4.5%
|
||
|
Rate of compensation increases
|
3.0%-4.0%
|
3.0%-4.0%
|
3.0%-4.0%
|
||
76
The assumptions for expected rate of return on assets were developed by considering the historical returns and expectations of future returns relevant to the country in which each plan is in effect and the investments applicable to the corresponding plan. The discount rate for each plan was derived by reference to appropriate benchmark yields on high quality corporate bonds, allowing for the approximate duration of both plan obligations and the relevant benchmark index.
Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) consist of:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Unrecognized transition obligation
|
$
|
2,318
|
|
$
|
2,430
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized prior service cost
|
450
|
|
468
|
|
|||
|
Unrealized net loss
|
9,288
|
|
7,015
|
|
|||
|
Amount recognized
|
$
|
12,056
|
|
$
|
9,913
|
|
|
Amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) expected to be recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost over the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
are as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ending
June 30, 2012
|
||
|
Unrecognized transition obligation
|
$
|
386
|
|
|
Unrecognized prior service cost
|
64
|
|
|
|
Unrealized net loss
|
296
|
|
|
|
Amount expected to be recognized
|
$
|
746
|
|
The components of the Company's net periodic cost relating to its foreign subsidiaries' defined pension plans are as follows:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Components of net periodic pension cost
|
|||||||||||
|
Service cost, net of plan participant contributions
|
$
|
3,184
|
|
$
|
2,249
|
|
$
|
2,422
|
|
||
|
Interest cost
|
1,270
|
|
1,020
|
|
756
|
|
|||||
|
Return on plan assets
|
(289
|
)
|
(215
|
)
|
(283
|
)
|
|||||
|
Amortization of transitional obligation
|
366
|
|
28
|
|
35
|
|
|||||
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
61
|
|
44
|
|
27
|
|
|||||
|
Amortization of net loss
|
178
|
|
98
|
|
249
|
|
|||||
|
Acquisitions
|
—
|
|
313
|
|
—
|
|
|||||
|
Adjustment
|
—
|
|
3,154
|
|
—
|
|
|||||
|
Loss due to settlement/curtailment
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
271
|
|
|||||
|
Net periodic pension cost
|
$
|
4,770
|
|
$
|
6,691
|
|
$
|
3,477
|
|
||
77
Fair Value of Plan Assets
Fair value is the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value of plan assets are as follows:
|
Level 1
|
|
Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity has the ability to access.
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Valuations based on inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
|
The foreign plans’ investments are managed by third-party trustees consistent with regulations or market practice of the country where the assets are invested. The Company is not actively involved in the investment strategy nor does it have control over the target allocation of these investments. These investments made up
100%
of total foreign plan assets in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
.
Expected funding for the foreign plans during the fiscal year ending
June 30, 2012
is
$1.4 million
.
The total benefits to be paid from the foreign pension plans are not expected to exceed
$3.3 million
in any year through 2021.
Foreign plan assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis consisted of the following investment categories as of
June 30, 2011
:
|
(In thousands)
|
Total
|
Quoted Prices in
Active Markets
for Identical
Assets (Level 1)
|
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
(Level 3)
|
|||||||||||
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
7,455
|
|
$
|
7,455
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
|
Government, municipal securities, and other
|
3,580
|
|
—
|
|
3,580
|
|
—
|
|
|||||||
|
Total assets measured at fair value
|
$
|
11,035
|
|
$
|
7,455
|
|
$
|
3,580
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|||
Concentration of Risk
The Company manages a variety of risks, including market, credit and liquidity risks, across its plan assets through its investment managers. The Company defines a concentration of risk as an undiversified exposure to one of the above-mentioned risks that increases the exposure of the loss of plan assets unnecessarily. The Company monitors exposure to such risks in the foreign plans by monitoring the magnitude of the risk in each plan and diversifying the Company's exposure to such risks across a variety of instruments, markets and counterparties. As of June 30,
2011
, the Company did not have concentrations of risk in any single entity, manager, counterparty, sector, industry or country.
NOTE 12 — INCOME TAXES
The components of income (loss) before income taxes are as follows:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Domestic income (loss) before income taxes
|
$
|
752,163
|
|
$
|
122,219
|
|
$
|
(534,439
|
)
|
||
|
Foreign income (loss) before income taxes
|
357,903
|
|
168,962
|
|
(68,092
|
)
|
|||||
|
Total income (loss) before income taxes
|
$
|
1,110,066
|
|
$
|
291,181
|
|
$
|
(602,531
|
)
|
||
78
The provision for (benefit from) income taxes is comprised of the following:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||||||
|
Current:
|
|||||||||||
|
Federal
|
$
|
225,192
|
|
$
|
63,687
|
|
$
|
(136,906
|
)
|
||
|
State
|
2,095
|
|
8,799
|
|
(3,545
|
)
|
|||||
|
Foreign
|
31,578
|
|
30,225
|
|
32,647
|
|
|||||
|
$
|
258,865
|
|
$
|
102,711
|
|
$
|
(107,804
|
)
|
|||
|
Deferred:
|
|||||||||||
|
Federal
|
$
|
40,908
|
|
$
|
(9,258
|
)
|
$
|
43,194
|
|
||
|
State
|
26,458
|
|
(3,689
|
)
|
31,577
|
|
|||||
|
Foreign
|
(10,653
|
)
|
(10,883
|
)
|
(46,130
|
)
|
|||||
|
56,713
|
|
(23,830
|
)
|
28,641
|
|
||||||
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
$
|
315,578
|
|
$
|
78,881
|
|
$
|
(79,163
|
)
|
||
For the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, the Company did not recognize any benefits from employee stock activity deductions, and therefore the Company did not reduce actual current tax liabilities, or record any increases to capital in excess of par value, for those years in connection with such benefits.
The significant components of deferred income tax assets and liabilities are as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
||||||
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|||||||
|
Tax credits and net operating losses
|
$
|
62,173
|
|
$
|
83,480
|
|
|
|
Employee benefits accrual
|
86,741
|
|
70,845
|
|
|||
|
Stock-based compensation
|
66,638
|
|
88,078
|
|
|||
|
Capitalized R&D expenses
|
84,283
|
|
110,286
|
|
|||
|
Inventory reserves
|
55,451
|
|
67,141
|
|
|||
|
Non-deductible reserves
|
50,304
|
|
54,038
|
|
|||
|
Deferred profit
|
95,157
|
|
83,700
|
|
|||
|
Unearned revenue
|
27,723
|
|
19,648
|
|
|||
|
Other
|
36,853
|
|
43,352
|
|
|||
|
Gross deferred tax assets
|
565,323
|
|
620,568
|
|
|||
|
Valuation allowance
|
(30,722
|
)
|
(44,184
|
)
|
|||
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
$
|
534,601
|
|
$
|
576,384
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|||||||
|
Unremitted earnings of foreign subsidiaries not permanently reinvested
|
$
|
(25,293
|
)
|
$
|
(19,863
|
)
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
(21,047
|
)
|
(6,148
|
)
|
|||
|
Unrealized gain on investments
|
(2,215
|
)
|
(1,409
|
)
|
|||
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
(48,555
|
)
|
(27,420
|
)
|
|||
|
Total net deferred tax assets
|
$
|
486,046
|
|
$
|
548,964
|
|
|
As of
June 30, 2011
, the Company had U.S. federal, state and foreign net operating loss (“NOL”) carry-forwards of approximately
$45.5 million
,
$117.6 million
and
$43.9 million
, respectively. The U.S. net operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards will expire at various dates beginning in
2023 through 2029
. The utilization of NOLs created by acquired companies is subject to annual limitations under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. However, it is not expected that such annual limitation will impair the realization of these NOLs. The state NOLs will begin to expire in
2013
. State credits of
$42.7 million
will be carried over indefinitely. The foreign net operating loss carry-forwards will begin to expire in
2013
.
79
The net deferred tax asset valuation allowance was
$30.7 million
as of June 30,
2011
and
$44.2 million
as of June 30,
2010
. The valuation allowance is based on the Company’s assessment that it is more likely than not that certain deferred tax assets will not be realized in the foreseeable future. Of the valuation allowance as of June 30,
2011
,
$26.8 million
relates to state credit carry-forwards. The remainder of the valuation allowance relates primarily to foreign net operating loss carry-forwards.
As of
June 30, 2011
, U.S. income taxes were not provided for on a cumulative total of approximately
$599.0 million
of undistributed earnings for certain non-U.S. subsidiaries. If these undistributed earnings were repatriated to the United States, they would generate foreign tax credits to reduce the federal tax liability associated with the foreign dividend. Assuming a full utilization of the foreign tax credits, the potential deferred tax liability associated with undistributed earnings would be approximately
$198.0 million
.
KLA-Tencor benefits from several tax holidays in Israel and Singapore where it manufactures certain of its products. These tax holidays are on approved investments and are scheduled to expire at varying times within the next
three to ten
years. The Company was in compliance with all the terms and conditions of the tax holidays as of
June 30, 2011
. The net impact of these tax holidays was to decrease the Company’s tax expense by approximately
$30.4 million
,
$12.7 million
and
$8.9 million
in the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively. The benefits of the tax holidays on diluted net income per share were
$0.18
,
$0.07
and
$0.05
for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
,
2009
, respectively.
The reconciliation of the United States federal statutory income tax rate to KLA-Tencor’s effective income tax rate is as follows:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||
|
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||
|
Federal statutory rate
|
35.0
|
%
|
35.0
|
%
|
35.0
|
%
|
||
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
3.2
|
%
|
0.7
|
%
|
(0.1
|
)%
|
||
|
Effect of foreign operations taxed at various rates
|
(9.0
|
)%
|
(9.6
|
)%
|
(1.5
|
)%
|
||
|
Research and development tax credit
|
(1.2
|
)%
|
(1.2
|
)%
|
1.8
|
%
|
||
|
Net change in tax reserves
|
2.1
|
%
|
0.5
|
%
|
2.2
|
%
|
||
|
Domestic manufacturing benefit
|
(1.9
|
)%
|
(1.7
|
)%
|
(0.2
|
)%
|
||
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
(0.7
|
)%
|
(0.1
|
)%
|
(6.4
|
)%
|
||
|
Non-deductible impairment of goodwill
|
—
|
%
|
—
|
%
|
(16.0
|
)%
|
||
|
Effect of stock-based compensation
|
1.4
|
%
|
4.0
|
%
|
(0.5
|
)%
|
||
|
Other
|
(0.5
|
)%
|
(0.5
|
)%
|
(1.2
|
)%
|
||
|
Effective income tax rate
|
28.4
|
%
|
27.1
|
%
|
13.1
|
%
|
||
Windfall tax benefits arise when a company's tax deduction for employee stock activity exceeds book compensation for the same activity. A shortfall arises when the tax deduction is less than book compensation. Windfalls are recorded as increases to capital in excess of par value. Shortfalls are recorded as decreases to capital in excess of par value to the extent that cumulative windfalls exceed cumulative shortfalls. Shortfalls in excess of cumulative windfalls are recorded as provision for income taxes. The Company incurred
$15.2 million
of additional tax expense during the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
due to shortfalls from employee stock activities. The Company's cumulative windfall balance reset to zero on July 1, 2011, since there was a cumulative shortfall in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011.
80
A reconciliation of the gross unrecognized tax benefit is as follows:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||
|
Unrecognized tax benefits at the beginning of the period
|
$
|
53,492
|
|
$
|
49,738
|
|
$
|
64,602
|
|
||
|
Increases for tax positions taken in prior years
|
5,228
|
|
6,553
|
|
231
|
|
|||||
|
Decreases for tax positions taken in prior years
|
—
|
|
(1,897
|
)
|
(11,037
|
)
|
|||||
|
Increases for tax positions taken in current year
|
32,152
|
|
10,912
|
|
4,832
|
|
|||||
|
Decreases for settlements with taxing authorities
|
(11,786
|
)
|
—
|
|
(968
|
)
|
|||||
|
Decreases for lapsing of the statute of limitations
|
(749
|
)
|
(11,814
|
)
|
(7,922
|
)
|
|||||
|
Unrecognized tax benefits at the end of the period
|
$
|
78,337
|
|
$
|
53,492
|
|
$
|
49,738
|
|
||
The amount of unrecognized tax benefits that would impact the effective tax rate was
$78.3 million
as of
June 30, 2011
. KLA-Tencor’s policy is to include interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within interest income and other, net. The amount of interest and penalties accrued as of June 30,
2011
and
2010
was approximately
$7.2 million
and
$5.5 million
, respectively.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, the Company settled an Israel income tax examination for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2007 through June 30, 2009. As a result of the settlement, the Company reduced its unrecognized tax benefits by
$10.1 million
, of which
$8.0 million
was a decrease in tax expense.
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, the Company completed a United States federal income tax examination for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2007 through June 30, 2009 (which remains subject to review by the Joint Committee of Taxation). The Company also received a proposed adjustment from the tax authorities in Japan related to their examination of the fiscal years ended June 30, 2006 through June 30, 2010. The Company believes that adequate amounts have been reserved for any adjustments that may ultimately result from these examinations.
The Company is subject to federal income tax examinations for all years beginning from the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010. The Company is subject to state income tax examinations for all years beginning from the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. The Company is also subject to examinations in other major foreign jurisdictions, including Singapore, for all years beginning from the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007. The Company believes that adequate amounts have been reserved for any adjustments that may ultimately result from any future examinations of these years.
It is possible that certain examinations may be concluded in the next twelve months. The Company believes it is possible that it may recognize up to
$39.2 million
of its existing unrecognized tax benefits within the next twelve months as a result of the lapse of statutes of limitations, and the resolution of examinations with various tax authorities.
NOTE 13 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Factoring.
KLA-Tencor has agreements with financial institutions to sell certain of its trade receivables and promissory notes from customers without recourse. The Company does not believe it is at risk for any material losses as a result of these agreements. In addition, from time to time the Company will discount, without recourse, letters of credit (“LCs”) received from customers in payment for goods.
The following table shows total receivables sold under factoring agreements, proceeds from sales of LCs and related discounting fees paid for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Receivables sold under factoring agreements
|
$
|
313,578
|
|
$
|
107,666
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of LCs
|
$
|
140,534
|
|
$
|
37,226
|
|
|
|
Discounting fees paid on sales of LCs(1)
|
$
|
213
|
|
$
|
189
|
|
|
__________________
|
(1)
|
Discounting fees include bank fees and interest expense and were recorded in interest income and other, net.
|
81
Facilities.
KLA-Tencor leases certain of its facilities under arrangements that are accounted for as operating leases. Rent expense was
$8.5 million
,
$11.1 million
and
$12.3 million
for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, respectively.
The following is a schedule of expected operating lease payments:
|
Year ending June 30,
|
Amount
(In thousands)
|
||
|
2012
|
$
|
7,992
|
|
|
2013
|
6,001
|
|
|
|
2014
|
3,889
|
|
|
|
2015
|
2,106
|
|
|
|
2016
|
1,869
|
|
|
|
2017 and thereafter
|
3,130
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
$
|
24,987
|
|
Purchase Commitments.
KLA-Tencor maintains certain open inventory purchase commitments with its suppliers to ensure a smooth and continuous supply for key components. The Company's liability under these purchase commitments is generally restricted to a forecasted time-horizon as mutually agreed upon between the parties. This forecasted time-horizon can vary among different suppliers. The Company’s open inventory purchase commitments were approximately
$352 million
as of June 30,
2011
and are primarily due within the next
12
months. Actual expenditures will vary based upon the volume of the transactions and length of contractual service provided. In addition, the amounts paid under these arrangements may be less in the event that the arrangements are renegotiated or canceled. Certain agreements provide for potential cancellation penalties.
Guarantees.
KLA-Tencor provides standard warranty coverage on its systems for
40
hours per week for twelve months, providing labor and parts necessary to repair the systems during the warranty period. The Company accounts for the estimated warranty cost as a charge to costs of revenues when revenue is recognized. The estimated warranty cost is based on historical product performance and field expenses. Utilizing actual service records, the Company calculates the average service hours and parts expense per system and applies the actual labor and overhead rates to determine the estimated warranty charge. The Company updates these estimated charges on a quarterly basis. The actual product performance and/or field expense profiles may differ, and in those cases the Company adjusts its warranty accruals accordingly.
The following table provides the changes in the product warranty accrual for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
21,109
|
|
$
|
18,213
|
|
|
|
Accruals for warranties issued during the period
|
46,565
|
|
24,164
|
|
|||
|
Changes in liability related to pre-existing warranties
|
(928
|
)
|
(2,401
|
)
|
|||
|
Settlements made during the period
|
(25,218
|
)
|
(18,867
|
)
|
|||
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
41,528
|
|
$
|
21,109
|
|
|
The Company maintains guarantee arrangements available through various financial institutions for up to
$20.4 million
, of which
$17.9 million
had been issued as of
June 30, 2011
primarily to fund guarantees to customs authorities for VAT and other operating requirements of the Company's subsidiaries in Europe and Asia.
KLA-Tencor is a party to a variety of agreements pursuant to which it may be obligated to indemnify the other party with respect to certain matters. Typically, these obligations arise in connection with contracts and license agreements or the sale of assets, under which the Company customarily agrees to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from, or provides customers with other remedies to protect against, bodily injury or damage to personal property caused by the Company's products, non-compliance with the Company's product performance specifications, infringement by the Company's products of third-party intellectual property rights and a breach of warranties, representations and covenants related to such matters as title to assets sold, validity of certain intellectual property rights, non-infringement of third-party rights, and certain income tax-related matters. In each of these circumstances, payment by the Company is typically subject to the other party making a claim to and cooperating with the Company pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. This usually allows the Company to challenge the other party’s claims or, in case of breach of intellectual property representations or covenants, to control the defense or settlement of any third-party claims brought against the other party. Further, the Company's obligations
82
under these agreements may be limited in terms of amounts, activity (typically at the Company's option to replace or correct the products or terminate the agreement with a refund to the other party), and duration. In some instances, the Company may have recourse against third parties and/or insurance covering certain payments made by the Company.
Subject to certain limitations, the Company is obligated to indemnify its current and former directors, officers and employees with respect to certain litigation matters and investigations that arise in connection with their service to the Company. These obligations arise under the terms of its certificate of incorporation, its bylaws, applicable contracts, and Delaware and California law. The obligation to indemnify generally means that the Company is required to pay or reimburse the individuals’ reasonable legal expenses and possibly damages and other liabilities incurred in connection with these matters.
It is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future payments under these or similar agreements due to the conditional nature of the Company's obligations and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, payments made by the Company under these agreements have not had a material effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
NOTE 14 — LITIGATION AND OTHER LEGAL MATTERS
Indemnification Obligations.
As a result of the Company's indemnification obligations in connection with the litigation and government inquiries related to the Company's historical stock option practices, the Company is currently paying defense costs to one former officer and employee facing an SEC civil action to which the Company is not a party, and the Company is also obligated to pay the attorneys' fees and expenses incurred by former employees in connection with discovery undertaken in that case. The Company is further incurring costs associated with retaining counsel to respond to discovery requests and otherwise representing the Company in that litigation. Although the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these arrangements is theoretically unlimited, the Company believes the fair value of this liability, to the extent estimable, is appropriately considered within the reserve it has established for currently pending legal proceedings.
Other Legal Matters.
The Company is named from time to time as a party to lawsuits in the normal course of its business. Actions filed against the Company include commercial, intellectual property, customer, and labor and employment related claims, including complaints of alleged wrongful termination and potential class action lawsuits regarding alleged violations of federal and state wage and hour and other laws. Litigation, in general, and intellectual property and securities litigation in particular, can be expensive and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the results of legal proceedings are difficult to predict, and the costs incurred in litigation can be substantial, regardless of outcome. The Company believes the amounts provided in the Company's consolidated financial statements are adequate in light of the probable and estimated liabilities. However, because such matters are subject to many uncertainties, the ultimate outcomes are not predictable, and there can be no assurances that the actual amounts required to satisfy alleged liabilities from the matters described above will not exceed the amounts reflected in the Company's consolidated financial statements or will not have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.
NOTE 15 — RESTRUCTURING CHARGES
The Company has in recent years undertaken a number of cost reduction activities, including workforce reductions, in an effort to lower its quarterly operating expense run rate. The program in the United States is accounted for in accordance with the authoritative guidance related to compensation for non-retirement post-employment benefits
,
whereas the programs in the international locations are accounted for in accordance with the authoritative guidance for contingencies. During the fiscal year ended June 30,
2011
, the Company recorded a
$4.1 million
net restructuring charge, of which
$1.4 million
was recorded to costs of revenues,
$0.4 million
was recorded to engineering, research and development expense and
$2.3 million
was recorded to selling, general and administrative expense. These charges represent the estimated minimum liability associated with expected termination benefits to be provided to employees after employment.
83
The following table shows the activity primarily related to severance and benefits expense for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
:
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
|||||
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
1,221
|
|
$
|
8,086
|
|
|
|
Restructuring costs
|
4,420
|
|
5,143
|
|
|||
|
Adjustments
|
(325
|
)
|
(906
|
)
|
|||
|
Cash payments
|
(3,455
|
)
|
(11,102
|
)
|
|||
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
1,861
|
|
$
|
1,221
|
|
|
Substantially all of the remaining accrued restructuring balance related to the Company’s workforce reductions is expected to be paid out by the end of calendar year
2011
.
NOTE 16 — DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
The authoritative guidance requires companies to recognize all derivative instruments and hedging activities, including foreign currency exchange contracts, as either assets or liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet. Changes in the fair value of derivatives that do not qualify for hedge treatment, as well as the ineffective portion of any hedges, are reflected in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. In accordance with the guidance, the Company designates foreign currency forward exchange contracts as cash flow hedges of certain forecasted foreign currency denominated sales and purchase transactions.
KLA-Tencor’s foreign subsidiaries operate and sell KLA-Tencor’s products in various global markets. As a result, KLA-Tencor is exposed to risks relating to changes in foreign currency exchange rates. KLA-Tencor utilizes foreign currency forward exchange contracts and option contracts to hedge against future movements in foreign exchange rates that affect certain existing and forecasted foreign currency denominated sales and purchase transactions, such as the Japanese yen, the euro and the Israeli shekel. KLA-Tencor does not use derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes. The Company routinely hedges its exposures to certain foreign currencies with various financial institutions in an effort to minimize the impact of certain currency exchange rate fluctuations. These currency forward exchange contracts and options, designated as cash flow hedges, generally have maturities of less than
18
months. Cash flow hedges are evaluated for effectiveness monthly, based on changes in total fair value of the derivatives. If a financial counterparty to any of the Company’s hedging arrangements experiences financial difficulties or is otherwise unable to honor the terms of the foreign currency hedge, the Company may experience material losses.
For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges, the effective portion of the gain or loss on the derivative is reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (“OCI”) and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings. Changes in the fair value of currency forward exchange and option contracts due to changes in time value are excluded from the assessment of effectiveness. Gains and losses on the derivative representing either hedge ineffectiveness or hedge components excluded from the assessment of effectiveness are recognized in current earnings.
For derivative instruments that are not designated as accounting hedges, gains and losses are recognized in interest income and other, net. The majority of such derivatives are foreign currency forward contracts to hedge certain foreign currency denominated assets or liabilities. The gains and losses on these derivatives are largely offset by the changes in the fair value of the assets or liabilities being hedged.
84
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging Relationships: Foreign Exchange Contracts
The location and amounts of designated and non-designated derivative instruments’ gains and losses reported in the consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
Location in Financial Statements
|
As of
June 30, 2011 |
As of
June 30, 2010 |
|||||
|
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments
|
||||||||
|
Gain (loss) in accumulated OCI on derivatives (effective portion)
|
Accumulated OCI
|
$
|
47
|
|
$
|
(2,274
|
)
|
|
|
Loss reclassified from accumulated OCI into income (effective portion):
|
Revenues
|
$
|
(2,491
|
)
|
$
|
(1,399
|
)
|
|
|
Costs of revenues
|
531
|
|
(493
|
)
|
||||
|
Total loss reclassified from accumulated OCI into income (effective portion)
|
$
|
(1,960
|
)
|
$
|
(1,892
|
)
|
||
|
Gain (loss) recognized in income on derivatives (ineffectiveness portion and amount excluded from effectiveness testing)
|
Interest income and other, net
|
$
|
468
|
|
$
|
(398
|
)
|
|
|
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments
|
||||||||
|
Loss recognized in income
|
Interest income and other, net
|
$
|
(2,024
|
)
|
$
|
(15,182
|
)
|
|
The U.S. dollar equivalent of all outstanding notional amounts of hedge contracts, with maximum maturity of
13
months, as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
was as follows:
|
(In thousands)
|
As of
June 30, 2011 |
As of
June 30, 2010 |
|||||
|
Cash flow hedge contracts
|
|||||||
|
Purchase
|
$
|
3,381
|
|
$
|
15,835
|
|
|
|
Sell
|
$
|
30,133
|
|
$
|
32,853
|
|
|
|
Other foreign currency hedge contracts
|
|||||||
|
Purchase
|
$
|
174,499
|
|
$
|
82,535
|
|
|
|
Sell
|
$
|
216,738
|
|
$
|
104,414
|
|
|
85
The location and fair value amounts of the Company’s derivative instruments reported in its Consolidated Balance Sheets as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
were as follows:
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
June 30,
2011 |
June 30,
2010 |
Balance Sheet Location
|
June 30,
2011 |
June 30,
2010 |
|||||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
Fair Value
|
Fair Value
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Foreign exchange contracts
|
Other current assets
|
$
|
145
|
|
$
|
125
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
$
|
475
|
|
$
|
2,033
|
|
|||||
|
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
$
|
145
|
|
$
|
125
|
|
$
|
475
|
|
$
|
2,033
|
|
|||||||
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Foreign exchange contracts
|
Other current assets
|
$
|
1,825
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
$
|
1,652
|
|
$
|
3,791
|
|
|||||
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
$
|
1,825
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
$
|
1,652
|
|
$
|
3,791
|
|
|||||||
|
Total derivatives
|
$
|
1,970
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
$
|
2,127
|
|
$
|
5,824
|
|
|||||||
The following table provides the balances and changes in the accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) related to derivative instruments for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2011
:
|
(In thousands)
|
Year ended
June 30, 2011 |
||
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
(1,995
|
)
|
|
Amount reclassified to income
|
1,960
|
|
|
|
Net change
|
47
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
12
|
|
NOTE 17 — SEGMENT REPORTING AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
KLA-Tencor reports one reportable segment in accordance with the provisions of the authoritative guidance for segment reporting. Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. KLA-Tencor’s chief operating decision maker is the Chief Executive Officer.
The Company is engaged primarily in designing, manufacturing and marketing process control and yield management solutions for the semiconductor and related nanoelectronics industries. All operating units have been aggregated due to their inter-dependencies, commonality of long-term economic characteristics, products and services, the production processes, class of customer and distribution processes. The Company’s service products are an extension of the system product portfolio and provide customers with spare parts and fab management services (including system preventive maintenance and optimization services) to improve yield, increase production uptime and throughput, and lower the cost of ownership. Since the Company operates in one segment, all financial segment information required by the authoritative guidance can be found in the consolidated financial statements.
The Company's significant operations outside the United States include manufacturing facilities in Israel and Singapore, and sales, marketing and service offices in Western Europe, Japan and the Asia Pacific regions. For geographical revenue reporting, revenues are attributed to the geographic location in which the customer is located. Long-lived assets consist primarily of net property and equipment and are attributed to the geographic region in which they are located.
86
The following is a summary of revenues by geographic region for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
(as a percentage of total revenues):
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
United States
|
$
|
610,955
|
|
19
|
%
|
$
|
341,079
|
|
19
|
%
|
$
|
372,887
|
|
24
|
%
|
|||||
|
Taiwan
|
864,378
|
|
27
|
%
|
688,089
|
|
38
|
%
|
181,411
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Japan
|
413,208
|
|
13
|
%
|
239,393
|
|
13
|
%
|
437,081
|
|
29
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Europe & Israel
|
340,249
|
|
11
|
%
|
111,497
|
|
6
|
%
|
162,665
|
|
11
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Korea
|
480,488
|
|
15
|
%
|
151,198
|
|
8
|
%
|
187,624
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Rest of Asia
|
465,889
|
|
15
|
%
|
289,504
|
|
16
|
%
|
178,548
|
|
12
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
100
|
%
|
|||||
The following is a summary of revenues by major products for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
(as a percentage of total revenues):
|
(Dollar amounts in thousands)
|
Year ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Revenues:
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Defect inspection
|
$
|
2,039,856
|
|
64
|
%
|
$
|
1,011,027
|
|
56
|
%
|
$
|
779,914
|
|
51
|
%
|
|||||
|
Metrology
|
498,904
|
|
16
|
%
|
261,105
|
|
14
|
%
|
228,501
|
|
15
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Service
|
561,729
|
|
18
|
%
|
496,490
|
|
27
|
%
|
458,090
|
|
30
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Other
|
74,678
|
|
2
|
%
|
52,138
|
|
3
|
%
|
53,711
|
|
4
|
%
|
||||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
3,175,167
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,820,760
|
|
100
|
%
|
$
|
1,520,216
|
|
100
|
%
|
|||||
Long-lived assets by geographic region as of
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
were as follows:
|
|
As of June 30,
|
||||||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
||||||||||
|
Long-lived assets:
|
|||||||||||||
|
United States
|
$
|
167,381
|
|
$
|
174,033
|
|
$
|
239,863
|
|
||||
|
Europe & Israel
|
125,302
|
|
127,474
|
|
143,410
|
|
|||||||
|
Japan
|
4,256
|
|
3,985
|
|
4,308
|
|
|||||||
|
Taiwan
|
803
|
|
714
|
|
714
|
|
802.767
|
|
1,021
|
|
|||
|
Korea
|
2,804
|
|
3,482
|
|
3,764
|
|
|||||||
|
Rest of Asia
|
53,106
|
|
56,141
|
|
64,868
|
|
|||||||
|
Total
|
$
|
353,652
|
|
$
|
365,829
|
|
$
|
457,234
|
|
||||
87
NOTE 18 — SALE AND IMPAIRMENT OF REAL ESTATE ASSETS
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2009, as part of the Company's cost reduction efforts, the Company decided to sell the remaining real estate properties owned by the Company in San Jose, California and a portion of the real estate property in Chennai, India. Based on the valuation of these assets using relevant market indicators such as range of estimated selling prices, the Company recorded asset impairment charges of
$2.4 million
, which were included in selling, general and administrative expenses. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, the Company recorded an asset impairment charge of
$15.1 million
based on the valuation of these assets using relevant market indicators including a range of estimated selling prices. The real estate properties are non-financial assets consistent with Level 3 fair value measurement. This impairment charge was included in selling, general and administrative expenses. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, the Company completed the sale of its remaining real estate properties in San Jose, California. The sale transaction, which closed on December 9, 2010, resulted in proceeds to the Company of
$18.2 million
and a gain on sale of
$1.4 million
recorded as an offset to selling, general and administrative expenses.
NOTE 19 — RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
During the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2011
,
2010
and
2009
, the Company purchased from, or sold to, several entities, where one or more executive officers of the Company or members of the Company’s Board of Directors, or their immediate family members, also serves as an executive officer or board member, including JDS Uniphase Corporation, Freescale Semiconductor, Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc. and National Semiconductor Corp. For the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
,
2010
and
2009
, the following table provides the transactions with these parties (for the portion of such period that they were considered related):
|
Year ended June 30,
|
||||||||
|
(In thousands)
|
2011
|
2010
|
2009
|
|||||
|
Total revenues
|
379
|
|
8,242
|
|
8,039
|
|
||
|
Total purchases
|
7,171
|
|
2,950
|
|
5,330
|
|
||
The Company had a receivable balance from these parties of
$0.2 million
and
$2.0 million
as of
June 30, 2011
and
2010
, respectively. Management believes that such transactions are at arm's length and on similar terms as would have been obtained from unaffiliated third parties.
NOTE 20 — SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
On July 12, 2011, the Company announced that its Board of Directors had authorized an increase of the level of the Company's quarterly dividend from
$0.25
to
$0.35
per share. On
August 4, 2011
, the Company declared a quarterly cash dividend of
$0.35
per share on the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, to be paid on
September 1, 2011
to stockholders of record on
August 15, 2011
.
NOTE 21 — QUARTERLY CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
The following is a summary of the Company’s quarterly consolidated results of operations (unaudited) for the fiscal years ended June 30,
2011
and
2010
.
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
First quarter
ended
September 30, 2010
|
Second quarter
ended
December 31, 2010
|
Third quarter
ended
March 31, 2011
|
Fourth quarter
ended
June 30, 2011
|
|||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$
|
682,342
|
|
$
|
766,327
|
|
$
|
834,059
|
|
$
|
892,439
|
|
|||
|
Total costs and operating expenses
|
$
|
446,726
|
|
$
|
497,461
|
|
$
|
522,280
|
|
$
|
548,370
|
|
|||
|
Gross margin
|
$
|
418,373
|
|
$
|
454,929
|
|
$
|
506,363
|
|
$
|
536,259
|
|
|||
|
Income from operations
|
$
|
235,616
|
|
$
|
268,866
|
|
$
|
311,779
|
|
$
|
344,069
|
|
|||
|
Net income
|
$
|
154,196
|
|
$
|
185,492
|
|
$
|
209,783
|
|
$
|
245,017
|
|
|||
|
Net income per share:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Basic(1)
|
$
|
0.92
|
|
$
|
1.11
|
|
$
|
1.25
|
|
$
|
1.46
|
|
|||
|
Diluted(1)
|
$
|
0.91
|
|
$
|
1.09
|
|
$
|
1.22
|
|
$
|
1.43
|
|
|||
88
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
First quarter
ended
September 30, 2009
|
Second quarter
ended
December 31, 2009
|
Third quarter
ended
March 31, 2010
|
Fourth quarter
ended
June 30, 2010
|
|||||||||||
|
Total revenues
|
$
|
342,687
|
|
$
|
440,355
|
|
$
|
478,299
|
|
$
|
559,419
|
|
|||
|
Total costs and operating expenses
|
$
|
327,737
|
|
$
|
393,260
|
|
$
|
387,020
|
|
$
|
398,577
|
|
|||
|
Gross margin
|
$
|
170,795
|
|
$
|
233,069
|
|
$
|
269,734
|
|
$
|
331,500
|
|
|||
|
Income from operations
|
$
|
14,950
|
|
$
|
47,095
|
|
$
|
91,279
|
|
$
|
160,842
|
|
|||
|
Net income
|
$
|
20,405
|
|
$
|
21,794
|
|
$
|
57,016
|
|
$
|
113,085
|
|
|||
|
Net income per share:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Basic(1)
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
$
|
0.33
|
|
$
|
0.67
|
|
|||
|
Diluted(1)
|
$
|
0.12
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
$
|
0.33
|
|
$
|
0.66
|
|
|||
__________________
|
(1)
|
Basic and diluted earnings per share are computed independently for each of the quarters presented based on the weighted average basic and fully diluted shares outstanding for each quarter. Therefore, the sum of quarterly basic and diluted per share information may not equal annual basic and diluted earnings per share.
|
89
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To The Board of Directors and Stockholders of KLA-Tencor Corporation
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of KLA-Tencor Corporation and its subsidiaries at June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended June 30, 2011 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of June 30, 2011, based on criteria established in
Internal Control—Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
August 5, 2011
90
|
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
|
None.
|
ITEM 9A.
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
|
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) (“Disclosure Controls”) as of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Report”) required by Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(b) or 15d-15(b). The controls evaluation was conducted under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”). Based on this evaluation, the CEO and CFO have concluded that as of the end of the period covered by this Report the Company’s Disclosure Controls were effective at a reasonable assurance level.
Attached as exhibits to this Report are certifications of the CEO and CFO, which are required in accordance with Rule 13a-14 of the Exchange Act. This Controls and Procedures section includes the information concerning the controls evaluation referred to in the certifications, and it should be read in conjunction with the certifications for a more complete understanding of the topics presented.
Definition of Disclosure Controls
Disclosure Controls are controls and procedures designed to reasonably assure that information required to be disclosed in the Company’s reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this Report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Disclosure Controls are also designed to reasonably assure that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Company’s management, including the CEO and CFO, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. The Company’s Disclosure Controls include components of its internal control over financial reporting, which consists of control processes designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of its financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. To the extent that components of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting are included within its Disclosure Controls, they are included in the scope of the Company’s annual controls evaluation.
Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the CEO and CFO, the Company conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting based on criteria established in the framework in
Internal Control—Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, the Company’s management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
June 30, 2011
.
The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of
June 30, 2011
has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls
The Company’s management, including the CEO and CFO, does not expect that the Company’s Disclosure Controls or internal control over financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of
91
two or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
|
ITEM 9B.
|
OTHER INFORMATION
|
None.
92
PART III
|
ITEM 10.
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
|
For the information required by this Item, see "Information About the Directors and the Nominees," “Information About Executive Officers,” “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management—Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Our Corporate Governance Practices—Standards of Business Conduct; Whistleblower Hotline and Website” and “Information About the Board of Directors and Its Committees—Audit Committee” in the Proxy Statement, which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
ITEM 11.
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
|
For the information required by this Item, see “Executive Compensation and Other Matters,” “Director Compensation” and "Information About the Board of Directors and Its Committees—Compensation Committee—Risk Considerations in Our Compensation Programs" in the Proxy Statement, which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
ITEM 12.
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
For the information required by this Item, see “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” and “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in the Proxy Statement, which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
ITEM 13.
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
|
For the information required by this Item, see “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” and “Information About the Board of Directors and Its Committees —The Board of Directors” in the Proxy Statement, which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
ITEM 14.
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
|
For the information required by this Item, see “Proposal Two: Ratification of Appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as Our Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the Fiscal Year Ending
June 30, 2012
” in the Proxy Statement, which is incorporated herein by reference.
93
PART IV
|
ITEM 15.
|
EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULE
|
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
1. Financial Statements:
The following financial statements and schedules of the Registrant are contained in Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K:
2. Financial Statement Schedule:
The following financial statement schedule of the Registrant is filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and should be read in conjunction with the financial statements:
All other schedules are omitted because they are either not applicable or the required information is shown in the Consolidated Financial Statements or notes thereto.
3. Exhibits
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||
|
2.1
|
Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger relating to the acquisition of ADE Corporation
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
2.1
|
May 26, 2006
|
|||||
|
2.2
|
Agreement Relating to a Friendly Take-Over Bid to be Brought for ICOS Vision Systems Corporation NV, entered into between the Company and ICOS Vision Systems Corporation NV, dated February 20, 2008
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
2.1
|
February 21, 2008
|
|||||
|
3.1
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
May 14, 1997
|
|||||
|
3.2
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
February 14, 2001
|
|||||
|
3.3
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
February 19, 2009
|
|||||
|
4.1
|
Amended and Restated Rights Agreement dated as of April 25, 1996 between the Company and The First National Bank of Boston, as Rights Agent. This agreement includes the Form of Right Certificate as Exhibit A and the Summary of Terms of Rights as Exhibit B
|
8-A/A,
Amendment
No. 2
|
No. 000-09992
|
1.0
|
September 24, 1996
|
|||||
|
4.2
|
Indenture dated as of May 2, 2008 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
4.1
|
May 6, 2008
|
|||||
94
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||
|
4.3
|
Form of 6.900% Senior Notes Due 2018 (included in Exhibit 4.2)
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
4.2
|
May 6, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.1
|
1998 Outside Director Option Plan*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-68423
|
10.1
|
December 4, 1998
|
|||||
|
10.2
|
Form of Option Agreement under 1998 Outside Director Option Plan*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.1
|
October 18, 2004
|
|||||
|
10.3
|
2000 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan (as amended August 2, 2002)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-100166
|
10.3
|
September 27, 2002
|
|||||
|
10.4
|
2004 Equity Incentive Plan (as amended and restated)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
October 8, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.5
|
Rules of the Company’s 2004 Equity Incentive Plan for the Grant of Restricted Stock Units to Participants in France*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.50
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.6
|
Notice of Grant of Restricted Stock Units*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.18
|
May 4, 2006
|
|||||
|
10.7
|
Option Grant Notification*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.1
|
September 29, 2005
|
|||||
|
10.8
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Notification (Performance-Vesting)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.19
|
September 20, 2006
|
|||||
|
10.9
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Notification (Service-Vesting)*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.17
|
August 7, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.10
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.20
|
September 20, 2006
|
|||||
|
10.11
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for U.S. Employees (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.44
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.12
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for French Participants (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.45
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.13
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for Non-U.S. Employees (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.14
|
Form of Stock Option Amendment and Special Bonus Agreement (with Chief Executive Officer)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
99.1
|
January 5, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.15
|
Form of Stock Option Amendment and Special Bonus Agreement*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
99.10
|
November 13, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.16
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended November 17, 1998)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-75944
|
10.10
|
December 26, 2001
|
|||||
|
10.17
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended December 2008, effective January 1, 2009)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.47
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.18
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended March 2009, effective July 1, 2009)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.52
|
March 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.19
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended December 2009, effective January 1, 2010)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.49
|
January 29, 2010
|
|||||
|
10.20
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended February 11, 2011)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.47
|
April 29, 2011
|
|||||
|
10.21
|
KLA Instruments Corporation Restated 1982 Stock Option Plan (as amended November 18, 1996)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-22941
|
10.74
|
March 7, 1997
|
|||||
95
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||
|
10.22
|
Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
|||||
|
10.23
|
Amendment No. 1 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
|||||
|
10.24
|
Amendment No. 2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
|||||
|
10.25
|
Amendment No. 3 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
|||||
|
10.26
|
Amendment No. 4 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
|||||
|
10.27
|
ADE Corporation’s 1995 Stock Option Plan*
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
|||||
|
10.28
|
ADE Corporation 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan*
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
|||||
|
10.29
|
Amendment to ADE Corporation’s 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan dated April 7, 1999*
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
|||||
|
10.30
|
ADE Corporation’s 2000 Employee Stock Option Plan (as amended)*
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
|||||
|
10.31
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement for Directors and Executive Officers*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.3
|
September 29, 1997
|
|||||
|
10.32
|
Performance Bonus Plan*
|
Proxy
|
No. 000-09992
|
App. B
|
September 24, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.33
|
Fiscal Year 2011 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.45
|
October 29, 2010
|
|||||
|
10.34
|
Fiscal Year 2010 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
October 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.35
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.41
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.36
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan (as amended January 1, 2009)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.49
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.37
|
Executive Severance Plan (as amended February 19, 2009)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.51
|
February 19, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.38
|
2010 Executive Severance Plan*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
January 28, 2011
|
|||||
|
10.39
|
Agreement between the Company and Ben Tsai (as amended and restated)*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.26
|
January 29, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.40
|
Letter Agreement between the Company and Brian M. Martin*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.28
|
May 7, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.41
|
Severance and Consulting Agreement between the Company and John Kispert*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.42
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.42
|
Letter Agreement between the Company and Mark Dentinger*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.43
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
12.10
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
|
|||||||||
|
21.1
|
List of Subsidiaries
|
|||||||||
|
23.1
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|||||||||
|
31.1
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
|||||||||
96
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||
|
31.2
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
|||||||||
|
32
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
|
|||||||||
|
*
|
Denotes a management contract, plan or arrangement
|
|
+
|
Confidential treatment has been requested as to a portion of this exhibit.
|
|
(1)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(2)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed February 22, 2002 (Commission File No. 333-83282).
|
|
(3)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed August 27, 2004 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(4)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed August 27, 2004 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(5)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2005 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(6)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to ADE Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2006 (Commission File No. 000-26714).
|
|
(7)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to ADE Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 1999 (Commission File No. 000-26714).
|
|
(8)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to ADE Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed February 18, 1998 (Commission File No. 333-46505).
|
|
(9)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to ADE Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Commission File No. 33-96408).
|
97
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
KLA-Tencor Corporation
|
|||
|
August 5, 2011
|
By:
|
|
/
S
/ R
ICHARD
P. W
ALLACE
|
|
|
(Date)
|
|
Richard P. Wallace
|
||
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
|||
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ R
ICHARD
P. W
ALLACE
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (principal executive officer)
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Richard P. Wallace
|
|
|
||
|
/s/ M
ARK
P. D
ENTINGER
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Mark P. Dentinger
|
|
|
||
|
/s/ V
IRENDRA
A. K
IRLOSKAR
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer (principal accounting officer)
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Virendra A. Kirloskar
|
||||
|
/s/ E
DWARD
W. B
ARNHOLT
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Edward W. Barnholt
|
||||
|
/s/ R
OBERT
P. A
KINS
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Robert P. Akins
|
||||
|
/s/ R
OBERT
T. B
OND
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Robert T. Bond
|
||||
|
/s/ R
OBERT
M. C
ALDERONI
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Robert M. Calderoni
|
||||
|
/s/ J
OHN
T. D
ICKSON
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
John T. Dickson
|
||||
|
/s/ E
MIKO
H
IGASHI
|
Director
|
August 5, 2011
|
||
|
Emiko Higashi
|
||||
98
|
/s/ S
TEPHEN
P. K
AUFMAN
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Stephen P. Kaufman
|
||||
|
/s/ K
EVIN
J. K
ENNEDY
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Kevin J. Kennedy
|
||||
|
/s/ K
IRAN
M. P
ATEL
|
|
Director
|
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
Kiran M. Patel
|
||||
|
/s/ D
AVID
C. W
ANG
|
|
Director
|
August 5, 2011
|
|
|
David C. Wang
|
||||
99
SCHEDULE II
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
|
(In thousands)
|
Balance at
Beginning
of Period
|
Charged to
Expense
|
Deductions/
Adjustments
|
Balance
at End
of Period
|
|||||||||||
|
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2009:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
|
$
|
12,257
|
|
$
|
23,279
|
|
$
|
(61
|
)
|
$
|
35,475
|
|
|||
|
Allowance for Deferred Tax Assets
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
38,791
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
38,791
|
|
|||
|
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2010:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
|
$
|
35,475
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
$
|
(3,681
|
)
|
$
|
31,874
|
|
|||
|
Allowance for Deferred Tax Assets
|
$
|
38,791
|
|
$
|
5,586
|
|
$
|
(193
|
)
|
$
|
44,184
|
|
|||
|
Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2011:
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
|
$
|
31,874
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(9,768
|
)
|
$
|
22,106
|
|
|||
|
Allowance for Deferred Tax Assets
|
$
|
44,184
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
$
|
(13,462
|
)
|
$
|
30,722
|
|
|||
100
KLA-TENCOR CORPORATION
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||||
|
2.1
|
Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger relating to the acquisition of ADE Corporation
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
2.1
|
May 26, 2006
|
|||||
|
2.2
|
Agreement Relating to a Friendly Take-Over Bid to be Brought for ICOS Vision Systems Corporation NV, entered into between the Company and ICOS Vision Systems Corporation NV, dated February 20, 2008
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
2.1
|
February 21, 2008
|
|||||
|
3.1
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
May 14, 1997
|
|||||
|
3.2
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
February 14, 2001
|
|||||
|
3.3
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
3.1
|
February 19, 2009
|
|||||
|
4.1
|
Amended and Restated Rights Agreement dated as of April 25, 1996 between the Company and The First National Bank of Boston, as Rights Agent. This agreement includes the Form of Right Certificate as Exhibit A and the Summary of Terms of Rights as Exhibit B
|
8-A/A,
Amendment
No. 2
|
No. 000-09992
|
1
|
September 24, 1996
|
|||||
|
4.2
|
Indenture dated as of May 2, 2008 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
4.1
|
May 6, 2008
|
|||||
|
4.3
|
Form of 6.900% Senior Notes Due 2018 (included in Exhibit 4.2)
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
4.2
|
May 6, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.1
|
1998 Outside Director Option Plan*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-68423
|
10.1
|
December 4, 1998
|
|||||
|
10.2
|
Form of Option Agreement under 1998 Outside Director Option Plan*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.1
|
October 18, 2004
|
|||||
|
10.3
|
2000 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan (as amended August 2, 2002)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-100166
|
10.3
|
September 27, 2002
|
|||||
|
10.4
|
2004 Equity Incentive Plan (as amended and restated)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
October 8, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.5
|
Rules of the Company’s 2004 Equity Incentive Plan for the Grant of Restricted Stock Units to Participants in France*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.50
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.6
|
Notice of Grant of Restricted Stock Units*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.2
|
May 4, 2006
|
|||||
|
10.7
|
Option Grant Notification*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.1
|
September 29, 2005
|
|||||
|
10.8
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Notification (Performance-Vesting)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.2
|
September 20, 2006
|
|||||
|
10.9
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Award Notification (Service-Vesting)*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.2
|
August 7, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.10
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.2
|
September 20, 2006
|
|||||
101
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||||
|
10.11
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for U.S. Employees (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.44
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.12
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for French Participants (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.45
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.13
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for Non-U.S. Employees (approved December 2008)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.14
|
Form of Stock Option Amendment and Special Bonus Agreement (with Chief Executive Officer)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
99.1
|
January 5, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.15
|
Form of Stock Option Amendment and Special Bonus Agreement*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
99.1
|
November 13, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.16
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended November 17, 1998)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-75944
|
10.1
|
December 26, 2001
|
|||||
|
10.17
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended December 2008, effective January 1, 2009)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.47
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.18
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended March 2009, effective July 1, 2009)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.52
|
March 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.19
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended December 2009, effective January 1, 2010)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.49
|
January 29, 2010
|
|||||
|
10.20
|
Amended and Restated 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (as amended February 11, 2011)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.47
|
April 29, 2011
|
|||||
|
10.21
|
KLA Instruments Corporation’s Restated 1982 Stock Option Plan (as amended November 18, 1996)*
|
S-8
|
No. 333-22941
|
10.74
|
March 7, 1997
|
|||||
|
10.22
|
Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
(1)
|
|||||
|
10.23
|
Amendment No. 1 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
(2)
|
|||||
|
10.24
|
Amendment No. 2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
(3)
|
|||||
|
10.25
|
Amendment No. 3 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
(4)
|
|||||
|
10.26
|
Amendment No. 4 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s 2000 Equity Incentive Plan*
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
(5)
|
|||||
|
10.27
|
ADE Corporation’s 1995 Stock Option Plan*
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
(6)
|
|||||
|
10.28
|
ADE Corporation’s 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan*
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
(7)
|
|||||
|
10.29
|
Amendment to ADE Corporation’s 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan dated April 7, 1999*
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
(8)
|
|||||
|
10.30
|
ADE Corporation’s 2000 Employee Stock Option Plan (as amended)*
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
(9)
|
|||||
|
10.31
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement for Directors and Executive Officers*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.3
|
September 29, 1997
|
|||||
102
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Exhibit Description
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
||||||||
|
Form
|
File No.
|
Exhibit
Number
|
Filing Date
|
|||||||
|
10.32
|
Performance Bonus Plan*
|
Proxy
|
No. 000-09992
|
App. B
|
September 24, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.33
|
Fiscal Year 2011 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.45
|
October 29, 2010
|
|||||
|
10.34
|
Fiscal Year 2010 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
October 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.35
|
Fiscal Year 2009 Performance Bonus Plan*+
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.41
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.36
|
Executive Deferred Savings Plan (as amended January 1, 2009)*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.49
|
January 30, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.37
|
Executive Severance Plan (as amended February 19, 2009)*
|
8-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.51
|
February 19, 2009
|
|||||
|
10.38
|
2010 Executive Severance Plan*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.46
|
January 28, 2011
|
|||||
|
10.39
|
Agreement between the Company and Ben Tsai (as amended and restated)*
|
10-K
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.26
|
January 29, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.40
|
Letter Agreement between the Company and Brian M. Martin*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.28
|
May 7, 2007
|
|||||
|
10.41
|
Severance and Consulting Agreement between the Company and John Kispert*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.42
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
10.42
|
Letter Agreement between the Company and Mark Dentinger*
|
10-Q
|
No. 000-09992
|
10.43
|
October 31, 2008
|
|||||
|
12.1
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
|
|||||||||
|
21.1
|
List of Subsidiaries
|
|||||||||
|
23.1
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|||||||||
|
31.1
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
|||||||||
|
31.2
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
|
|||||||||
|
32
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
|
|||||||||
|
*
|
Denotes a management contract, plan or arrangement.
|
|
+
|
Confidential treatment has been requested as to a portion of this exhibit.
|
|
(1)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2000 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(2)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed February 22, 2002 (Commission File No. 333-83282).
|
|
(3)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed August 27, 2004 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(4)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed August 27, 2004 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(5)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to Therma-Wave, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2005 (Commission File No. 000-26911).
|
|
(6)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to ADE Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2006 (Commission File No. 000-26714).
|
103
|
(7)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to ADE Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 30, 1999 (Commission File No. 000-26714).
|
|
(8)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to ADE Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, filed February 18, 1998 (Commission File No. 333-46505).
|
|
(9)
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to ADE Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (Commission File No. 33-96408).
|
104
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part IprintItem 1. BusinessprintItem 1A. Risk FactorsprintItem 1B. Unresolved Staff CommentsprintItem 2. PropertiesprintItem 3. Legal ProceedingsprintItem 4. (removed and Reserved)printPart IIprintItem 5. Market For Registrant S Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases Of Equity SecuritiesprintItem 6. Selected Financial DataprintItem 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis Of Financial Condition and Results Of OperationsprintItem 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market RiskprintItem 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary DataprintNote 1 Summary Of Significant Accounting PoliciesprintNote 2 Fair Value MeasurementsprintNote 3 Financial Statement ComponentsprintNote 4 Marketable SecuritiesprintNote 5 Business CombinationprintNote 6 Goodwill and Purchased Intangible AssetsprintNote 7 Long-term DebtprintNote 8 Stock-based CompensationprintNote 9 Stock Repurchase ProgramprintNote 10 Net Income (loss) Per ShareprintNote 11 Employee Benefit PlansprintNote 12 Income TaxesprintNote 13 Commitments and ContingenciesprintNote 14 Litigation and Other Legal MattersprintNote 15 Restructuring ChargesprintNote 16 Derivative Instruments and Hedging ActivitiesprintNote 17 Segment Reporting and Geographic InformationprintNote 18 Sale and Impairment Of Real Estate AssetsprintNote 19 Related Party TransactionsprintNote 20 Subsequent EventsprintNote 21 Quarterly Consolidated Results Of Operations (unaudited)printItem 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial DisclosureprintItem 9A. Controls and ProceduresprintItem 9B. Other InformationprintPart IIIprintItem 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate GovernanceprintItem 11. Executive CompensationprintItem 12. Security Ownership Of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder MattersprintItem 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director IndependenceprintItem 14. Principal Accounting Fees and ServicesprintPart IVprintItem 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Scheduleprint