SNPS » Topics » The EDA industry is highly competitive, and competition may have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

This excerpt taken from the SNPS 10-Q filed Sep 6, 2005.

The EDA industry is highly competitive, and competition may have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

 

We compete with other EDA vendors that offer a broad range of products and services, primarily Cadence Design Systems, Inc. and Mentor Graphics Corporation, and with EDA vendors that offer products focused on one or more discrete phases of the IC design process, such as Magma Design Automation, Inc., which has gained a meaningful position in one of our core segments. We also compete with customers’ internally developed design tools and capabilities. If we fail to compete effectively, our business will be materially and adversely affected.

 

We compete principally on technology leadership, product quality and features (including ease-of-use), time-to-results, post-sale support, interoperability with our own and other vendors’ products, price and payment terms. Additional competitive challenges include the following:

 

      Technology in the EDA industry evolves rapidly. Accordingly, we must correctly anticipate and lead critical developments, innovate rapidly and efficiently, improve our existing products, and successfully develop or acquire new products. If we fail to do so, competing technologies may reduce demand for our products and services.

 

      To compete effectively, we believe we must offer products that provide both a high level of integration into a comprehensive platform and a high level of individual product performance. Doing so requires significant engineering and development work. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to continue offering complete design flows in configurations our customers will find more attractive than our competitors’ offerings or that our efforts to balance the interests of integration versus individual product performance will be successful.

 

      Our major initiatives face intense competition and in some cases address emerging markets. We have invested significant resources into further development of our Galaxy Design Platform, integration of our Discovery Verification Platform and enhancement of its System Verilog and other advanced features and development of our Design for Manufacturing and IP portfolios, and have acquired companies that sell products in these areas. It is difficult for us to predict the success of these initiatives and acquisitions. If we fail to expand revenue from our new initiatives at the desired rate, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

 

      Price is an important competitive factor. Customers require a mix of price and tool performance that suits their needs; in

 

30



 

some cases this may lead them to choose vendors based on price more than performance. In certain situations we must offer substantial discounts on our products to meet pricing set by the competition. If, as we expect, customers begin to consolidate their purchases with fewer vendors, some EDA suppliers may pursue a deep discount strategy. As a result, prices for our products may decline and/or we may lose potential business to lower price competitors. In either case, our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

 

      Payment terms are also an important competitive factor and are aggressively negotiated by our customers. During the second half of fiscal 2003 and continuing through 2004 and 2005, payment terms on time-based licenses lengthened compared to prior periods, negatively affecting our cash flow from operations.

 

This excerpt taken from the SNPS 10-Q filed Jun 2, 2005.

The EDA industry is highly competitive, and competition may have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

 

We compete with other EDA vendors that offer a broad range of products and services, such as Cadence Design Systems, Inc. and Mentor Graphics Corporation, and with EDA vendors that offer products focused on one or more discrete phases of the IC design process, such as Magma Design Automation, Inc., which has grown rapidly in recent years and gained a meaningful position in one of our core segments. We also compete with customers’ internally developed design tools and capabilities. If we fail to compete effectively, our business will be materially and adversely affected.

 

We compete principally on technology leadership, product quality and features (including ease-of-use), time-to-results, post-sale support, interoperability with our own and other vendors’ products, price and payment terms. Additional competitive challenges include the following:

 

      Technology in the EDA industry evolves rapidly. Accordingly, we must correctly anticipate and lead critical developments, innovate rapidly and efficiently, improve our existing products, and successfully develop or acquire new products. If we fail to do so, competing technologies may reduce demand for our products and services.

 

      To compete effectively, we believe we must offer products that provide both a high level of integration into a comprehensive platform and a high level of individual product performance. Doing so requires significant engineering and development work. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to continue offering complete design flows in configurations our customers will find more attractive than our competitors’ offerings or that our efforts to balance the interests of integration versus individual product performance will be successful.

 

      Our major initiatives face intense competition and in some cases address emerging markets. We have invested significant resources into further development of the Galaxy Design Platform, integration of the Discovery Verification Platform and enhancement of its System Verilog features and development of our Design for Manufacturing and IP portfolios. It is difficult for us to predict the success of these initiatives. If we fail to expand revenue from our new initiatives at the desired rate, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

 

      Price is an important competitive factor. Customers require a mix of price and tool performance that suits their needs; in some cases this may lead them to choose vendors based on price more than performance. In certain situations we must offer substantial discounts on our products to meet pricing set by the competition. If, as we expect, customers begin to consolidate their purchases with fewer vendors, some EDA suppliers may pursue a deep discount strategy. As a result, average prices for our products may decline. Alternatively, we may lose potential business to lower price competitors. In either case, our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

 

28



 

      Payment terms are also an important competitive factor and are aggressively negotiated by our customers. During the second half of fiscal 2003 and continuing through 2004, payment terms on time-based licenses lengthened compared to prior periods, negatively affecting our cash flow from operations. In addition, since cash is collected sooner on an upfront license than on a time-based license, the shift in our license mix towards more time-based licenses will adversely affect our cash flow in fiscal 2005.

 

This excerpt taken from the SNPS 10-Q filed Mar 10, 2005.

           The EDA industry is highly competitive, and competition may have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

 

           We compete with other EDA vendors that offer a broad range of products and services, such as Cadence Design Systems and Mentor Graphics Corporation, and with EDA vendors that offer products focused on one or more discrete phases of the IC design process, such as Magma Design Automation, Inc., which has grown rapidly in recent years and gained a meaningful position in one of our core segments. We also compete with customers’ internally developed design tools and capabilities. If we fail to compete effectively, our business will be materially and adversely affected.

 

           We compete principally on technology leadership, product quality and features (including ease-of-use), time-to-results, post-sale support, interoperability with our own and other vendors’ products, price and payment terms. Additional competitive challenges include the following:

 

               Technology in the EDA industry evolves rapidly. Accordingly, we must correctly anticipate and lead critical developments, innovate rapidly and efficiently, improve our existing products, and successfully develop or acquire new products. If we fail to do so, competing technologies may reduce demand for our products and services.

 

               To compete effectively, we believe we must offer products that provide both a high level of integration into a comprehensive platform and a high level of individual product performance. Doing so requires significant engineering and development work. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to continue offering complete design flows in configurations our customers will find more attractive than our competitors’ offerings or that our efforts to balance the interests of integration versus individual product performance will be successful.

 

               Our major initiatives face intense competition and in some cases address emerging markets. We have invested significant resources into further development of the Galaxy Design Platform, integration of the Discovery Verification Platform and enhancement of its System Verilog features and development of our DFM and IP portfolios. It is difficult for us to predict the

 

24



 

success of these initiatives. If we fail to expand revenue from our new initiatives at the desired rate, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

 

               Price is an important competitive factor. Customers require a mix of price and tool performance that suits their needs; in some cases this may lead them to choose vendors based on price more than performance. In certain situations we must offer substantial discounts on our products due to competitive factors. As a result, average prices for our products may decline. Alternatively, we may lose potential business to a lower price competitor. In either case, our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

 

               Payment terms are also an important competitive factor and are aggressively negotiated by our customers. During the second half of fiscal 2003 and continuing through 2004, payment terms on time-based licenses lengthened compared to prior periods, negatively affecting our cash flow from operations. In addition, since cash is collected sooner on an upfront license than on a time-based license, the shift in our license mix towards more time-based licenses will adversely affect our cash flow in fiscal 2005.

 

This excerpt taken from the SNPS 10-K filed Jan 12, 2005.

        The EDA industry is highly competitive, and competition may have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

        We compete with other EDA vendors that offer a broad range of products and services, such as Cadence Design Systems and Mentor Graphics Corporation, and with EDA vendors that offer products focused on one or more discrete phases of the IC design process, such as Magma Design Automation, Inc., which has grown rapidly in recent years and gained a meaningful position in one of our core segments. We also compete with customers' internally developed design tools and capabilities. If we fail to compete effectively, our business will be materially and adversely affected.

        We compete principally on technology leadership, product quality and features (including ease-of-use), time-to-results, post-sale support, interoperability with our own and other vendors' products, price and payment terms. Additional competitive challenges include the following:

    Technology in the EDA industry evolves rapidly. Accordingly, we must correctly anticipate and lead critical developments, innovate rapidly and efficiently, improve our existing products, and successfully develop or acquire new products. If we fail to do so, competing technologies may reduce demand for our products and services.

    To compete effectively, we believe we must offer products that provide both a high level of integration into a comprehensive platform and a high level of individual product performance. Doing so requires significant engineering and development work. We can provide no assurance that we will be able to continue offering complete design flows in configurations our customers will find more attractive than our competitors' offerings or that our efforts to balance the interests of integration versus individual product performance will be successful.

    Our major initiatives face intense competition and in some cases address emerging markets. We are investing significant resources into further development of the Galaxy Design Platform,

46


      integration of the Discovery Verification Platform and enhancement of its System Verilog features and development of our DFM and IP portfolios. It is difficult for us to predict the success of these initiatives. If we fail to expand revenue from our new initiatives at the desired rate, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected.

    Price is an important competitive factor. Customers require a mix of price and tool performance that suits their needs; in some cases this may lead them to choose vendors based on price more than performance. In certain situations we must offer substantial discounts on our products due to competitive factors. As a result, average prices for our products may decline. Alternatively, we may lose potential business to a lower price competitor. In either case, our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.

    Payment terms are also an important competitive factor and are aggressively negotiated by our customers. During the second half of fiscal 2003 and continuing through 2004, payment terms on time-based licenses lengthened compared to prior periods, negatively affecting our cash flow from operations. In addition, customers' reluctance to agree to the payment terms required under our upfront licenses negatively impacted our revenue for the third fiscal quarter of fiscal 2004, and was a primary factor in our decision to shift our target license mix to an almost completely ratable business model. Since cash is collected sooner on an upfront license than on a time-based license, the shift in our license mix towards more time-based licenses will adversely affect our cash flow in fiscal 2005.
Wikinvest © 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. Use of this site is subject to express Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimer. By continuing past this page, you agree to abide by these terms. Any information provided by Wikinvest, including but not limited to company data, competitors, business analysis, market share, sales revenues and other operating metrics, earnings call analysis, conference call transcripts, industry information, or price targets should not be construed as research, trading tips or recommendations, or investment advice and is provided with no warrants as to its accuracy. Stock market data, including US and International equity symbols, stock quotes, share prices, earnings ratios, and other fundamental data is provided by data partners. Stock market quotes delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, 20 mins for NYSE and AMEX. Market data by Xignite. See data providers for more details. Company names, products, services and branding cited herein may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The use of trademarks or service marks of another is not a representation that the other is affiliated with, sponsors, is sponsored by, endorses, or is endorsed by Wikinvest.
Powered by MediaWiki