VERIFONE SYSTEMS, INC. 10-K 2009
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 001-32465
VERIFONE HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes þ No ¨
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No þ
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 þ No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ¨ No ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants 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. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No þ
As of April 30, 2009, the aggregate market value of the common stock of the registrant held by non-affiliates was approximately $471.9 million based on the closing sale price as reported on the New York Stock Exchange.
There were 84,633,459 shares of the registrants common stock issued and outstanding as of the close of business on December 15, 2009.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
As noted herein, the information called for by Part III is incorporated by reference to specified portions of the Registrants definitive proxy statement to be filed in conjunction with the Registrants 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which is expected to be filed not later than 120 days after the Registrants fiscal year ended October 31, 2009.
VERIFONE HOLDINGS, INC.
2009 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report and certain information incorporated by reference herein contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These statements relate to future events or our future financial performance. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as may, should, expect, plan, intend, anticipate, believe, estimate, predict, potential, or continue, the negative of such terms, or comparable terminology.
Actual events or results may differ materially. In evaluating these statements, you should specifically consider various factors, including the risks outlined in Item 1A-Risk Factors in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These factors may cause our actual results to differ materially from any forward-looking statement.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, events, levels of activity, performance, or achievements. Moreover, neither we nor any other person assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the forward-looking statements.
These statements relate to future events or our future financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These risks and other factors include those listed under Item 1A-Risk Factors in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and elsewhere in this report. We are under no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K to conform such statements to actual results or to changes in expectations.
We are a global leader in secure electronic payment solutions. We provide expertise, solutions, and services that add value to the point of sale with merchant-operated, consumer-facing, and self-service payment systems for the financial, retail, hospitality, petroleum, transportation, government, and healthcare vertical markets. Since 1981, we have designed and marketed system solutions that facilitate the long-term shift toward electronic payment transactions and away from cash and checks.
Our system solutions consist of point of sale electronic payment devices that run our proprietary and third-party operating systems, security and encryption software, and certified payment software as well as other third-party value-added applications. Our system solutions are able to process a wide range of payment types. They include signature and PIN-based debit cards, credit cards, contactless/radio frequency identification (RFID) cards and tokens, Near Field Communication (NFC), enabled mobile phones, smart cards, pre-paid gift and other stored-value cards, electronic bill payment, check authorization and conversion, signature capture, and electronic benefits transfer (EBT). Our proprietary architecture was the first to enable multiple value-added applications, such as gift card and loyalty card programs, healthcare insurance eligibility, and time and attendance tracking, to reside on the same system without requiring recertification when new applications are added to the system. We are an industry leader in multi-application payment system deployments and we believe we have the largest selection of certified value-added applications.
We design our system solutions to meet the demanding requirements of our direct and indirect customers. Our electronic payment systems are available in several modular configurations, offering our customers flexibility to support a variety of connectivity options, including wireline and wireless internet protocol (IP) technologies. We also offer our customers support for installed systems, consulting and project management services for system deployment, and customization of integrated software solution.
Security has become a driving factor in our business as our customers endeavor to meet ever escalating governmental requirements related to the prevention of identity theft as well as operating regulation safeguards issued by the credit and debit card associations, members of which include Visa International (Visa), MasterCard Worldwide (MasterCard), American Express, Discover Financial Services, and JCB Co., Ltd. (JCB). In September 2006, these card associations established the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council (PCI SSC) to oversee and unify industry standards in the areas of credit card data security, referred to as the PCI-PED standard which consists of PIN-entry device security (PED) and the PCI Data Security Standard (PCI-DSS) for enterprise data security, and the Payment Application Data Security Standard (PA-DSS) for payment application data security. We are a leader in providing systems and software solutions that meet these standards and have upgraded or launched next generation system solutions that span our product portfolio ahead of mandated deadlines.
VeriFone recently led the development of the Secure Point of Sale (POS) Vendor Alliance (SPVA). The SPVA is a non-profit organization that works with stakeholders in the payment value chain. The SPVA is open to participation from all POS vendors engaged in developing secure payment systems, as well as other businesses that interact with these payment system vendors. To date, its membership consists of major transaction acquirers, payment technology vendors, encryption vendors and other POS companies. The SPVA is currently focused on developing standards for secure, end-to-end encryption systems and developing standards for the secure management of payment devices through their lifecycle, from manufacturing, to deployment, to operation and repair and ultimately to removal from service. The standards will likely require major upgrades to existing software and hardware infrastructure over time and will create opportunities for the secure remote management and control of millions of deployed payment systems.
Our customers are primarily financial institutions, payment processors, petroleum companies, large retailers, government organizations, and healthcare companies, as well as independent sales organizations (ISO). The
functionality of our system solutions includes the capture of electronic payment data, certified transaction security, connectivity, compliance with regulatory standards and the flexibility to execute a variety of payment and non-payment applications on a single system solution.
VeriFone, Inc., our principal operating subsidiary, was incorporated in 1981. Shortly afterward, we introduced the first check verification and credit authorization device ever utilized by merchants in a commercial setting. In 1984, we introduced the first mass market electronic payment system intended to replace manual credit card authorization devices for small merchants. VeriFone, Inc. became a publicly traded company in 1990 and was acquired by Hewlett-Packard Company (HP) in 1997. HP operated VeriFone, Inc. as a division until July 2001, when it sold VeriFone, Inc. to Gores Technology Group, LLC, a privately held acquisition and investment management firm, in a transaction led by our Chief Executive Officer, Douglas G. Bergeron. In July 2002, Mr. Bergeron and certain investment funds affiliated with GTCR Golder Rauner, LLC, or GTCR, a private equity firm, led a recapitalization in which VeriFone Holdings, Inc. was organized as a holding company for VeriFone, Inc., and GTCR-affiliated funds became our majority stockholders. We completed our initial public offering on May 4, 2005. In June 2009, the GTCR-affiliated funds ceased to be beneficial owners of 5% or more of our outstanding common stock.
On November 1, 2006, we acquired Lipman Electronic Engineering Ltd. (Lipman). Prior to the acquisition, Lipman, a provider of electronic payment systems headquartered in Israel, developed, manufactured and marketed a variety of handheld, wireless and landline POS terminals, electronic cash registers, retail ATM units, PIN pads and smart card readers, as well as integrated PIN and smart card solutions. In connection with this acquisition, we issued 13,462,474 shares of our common stock and paid $347.4 million in cash in exchange for all the outstanding ordinary shares of Lipman. All options to purchase Lipman ordinary shares were exchanged for options to purchase approximately 3.4 million shares of our common stock. In addition, in accordance with the merger agreement, Lipmans Board of Directors declared a special cash dividend of $1.50 per Lipman ordinary share, or an aggregate amount of $40.4 million. This special cash dividend was paid prior to our acquisition of Lipman. The aggregate purchase price for this acquisition was $799.3 million.
The electronic payment solutions industry encompasses systems, software, and services that enable the acceptance and processing of electronic payments for goods and services and provide other value-added functionality at the point of sale. The electronic payment system is an important part of the payment processing infrastructure. We believe that current industry trends, including the global shift toward electronic payment transactions and away from cash and checks, the rapid penetration of electronic payments in emerging markets as those economies modernize, the increasing proliferation of IP, connectivity and wireless communication, and an increasing focus on security to combat fraud and identity theft, will continue to drive demand for electronic payment systems.
The electronic payment system serves as the interface between consumers and merchants at the point of sale and with the payment processing infrastructure. It captures critical electronic payment data, secures the data through sophisticated encryption software and algorithms, and routes the data across a range of payment networks for processing, authorization, and settlement. Payment networks include credit card networks, such as Visa, MasterCard, and American Express, that route credit card and signature-based debit transactions, as well as electronic funds transfer (EFT) networks, such as STAR, Interlink, and NYCE, that route PIN-based debit transactions. In a typical electronic payment transaction, the electronic payment system first captures and secures consumer payment data from one of a variety of payment media, such as a credit or debit card, smart card, or contactless/RFID card. Consumer payment data is then routed from the electronic payment system to the appropriate payment processor and financial institution for authorization. Finally, the electronic payment system receives the authorization to complete the transaction between the merchant and consumer.
The major trend driving growth in the global payments industry has been the move towards electronic payment transactions and away from cash and checks. This trend has been accelerated by the usage of credit and debit card based payments, especially PIN-based debit. Another key driver is the growth in single application credit card solutions, which enable merchants to provide an efficient payment solution in non-traditional settings such as the emergence of pay-at-the-table in restaurants, which is capitalizing on the development of wireless communications infrastructure. The key geographic, technological, and regulatory drivers for this trend towards electronic payments are discussed below.
Rapid Penetration of Electronic Payments in Emerging Markets
Certain regions, such as Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Asia, have lower rates of electronic payments and are experiencing rapid growth. The adoption of electronic payments in these regions is driven primarily by economic growth, infrastructure development, support from governments seeking to increase value-added tax (VAT) and sales tax collection, and the expanding presence of IP and wireless communication networks.
Broadband connectivity provides faster transmission of transaction data at a lower cost than traditional dial up telephone connections, enabling more advanced payment and other value-added applications at the point of sale. Major telecommunications carriers have expanded their communications networks and lowered fees, which allows more merchants to utilize IP-based networks cost effectively. The faster processing and lower costs associated with IP connectivity have opened new markets for electronic payment systems, including many that have been primarily cash-only industries such as quick service restaurants (QSRs). New wireless electronic payment solutions are being developed to increase transaction processing speed, throughput, and mobility at the point of sale, and offer significant security benefits by enabling consumers to avoid relinquishing their payment cards. A portable device can be presented to consumers, for example, to pay-at-the-table in full-service restaurants or to pay in other environments, such as outdoor arenas, pizza delivery, farmers markets, and taxi cabs.
Growth of Wireless Communications
The development and increased use of wireless communications infrastructure are increasing demand for compact, easy-to-use, and reliable wireless payment solutions. The flexibility, ease of installation, and mobility of wireless make this technology an attractive and often more cost-effective alternative to traditional landline-based telecommunications.
The wireless communications industry has grown substantially in the United States and globally over the past twenty years. Cellular and Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) communications fully support secure IP-based payment transactions. The increased speed of wireless communications, and ever-expanding coverage maps of standardized wireless data technologies such as General Packet Radio Service (GPRS), Bluetooth connectivity and Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) makes wireless telecommunications an attractive alternative to traditional telecommunications.
Mobile technologies enable new applications for electronic payment transactions, including pay-at-the-table and pay-at-the-curb in restaurants, as well as electronic card payments in environments that once required cash payments or more expensive off-line card acceptance. These include delivery services, in-home services, taxi, and limousine credit and debit card acceptance. Mobile technologies also facilitate establishment of unattended payment stations such as ticketing and vending kiosks.
Increasing Focus on Security to Minimize Fraud and Identity Theft
Industry security standards are constantly evolving, driving recertification and replacement of electronic payment systems, particularly in Europe and the United States. In order to offer electronic payment systems that
connect to payment networks, electronic payment system providers must certify their products and services with card associations, financial institutions, and payment processors and comply with government and telecommunications company regulations. This certification process may take up to twelve months to complete. See Industry Standards and Government Regulations for a more detailed description of these standards and regulations.
Storage and handling of credit card data by retailers represents a constant threat of fraud and identity theft, creating tremendous risk of financial and reputational losses.
The protection of cardholder data currently requires retailers to:
The current industry-wide response to this threat is to set site security policies across all enterprise systems. This approach is difficult and costly due to the complexity of most retail Information Technology (IT) environments, and is unlikely to guarantee protection against data breaches. Furthermore, any system change, no matter how small, may be costly and time consuming to retailers as modification of any portion of POS system usually requires end-to-end re-certification.
A PricewaterhouseCoopers research study recently commissioned by the PCI-SSC reviewed various security technologies such as end-to-end encryption, tokenization, virtual terminals and magnetic stripe imaging to assess the potential to reduce the scope of PCI-DSS audits on merchants and acquirers. Of these technologies, end-to-end encryption was identified as providing the highest reduction in audit scope and highlighted for its potential to remove usable cardholder data for the POS and processing systems.
Contactless Payments and Mobile Phone Initiated Payments based on NFC
Payments initiated via Contactless RFID and NFC technology continue to grow in popularity with trials, pilots, or rollouts taking place in all major geographies. Contactless payment credentials can be in the form of credit cards, key fobs, or other devices which use radio frequency communications between the payment credential and the point of sale system. According to the Smartcard Alliance, domestically there are over 18 million RFID-imbedded cards now in circulation and over 51,000 retail locations now able to accept contactless payments. This contactless acceptance infrastructure is not only capable of reading cards, key fobs, or token-based RFID payment media, but is also compatible with payments initiated via mobile phones using NFC technology.
Unattended Self-Service Kiosks and Outdoor Payment Systems
The growth in EuroPay, MasterCard, and Visa (EMV) transactions that require consumers to enter a secret PIN code has had a trickle down effect on all aspects of the payment acceptance infrastructure, including self-service market segments. Unattended applications such as automated ticketing machines, self-order kiosks, bill payment, product vending, telephone calling card top up, and self-checkout applications that historically relied on a simple magnetic stripe reader to process credit and debit payments now require complex and secure payment systems to interact with the consumer safely and securely. Due to the dramatic increase in complexities involved in developing compliant, secure, and certified payment solutions, most unattended and outdoor kiosk vendors have turned to traditional payment system vendors such as VeriFone to provide easy to integrate and pre-certified payment modules to enable the future of electronic payments in these environments.
Products and Services
Our System Solutions
Our system solutions are available in several distinctive modular configurations, offering our customers flexibility to support a variety of consumer payment and connectivity options, including wireline and wireless IP technologies.
Our countertop electronic payment systems accept magnetic, smart card, and contactless/RFID cards and support credit, debit, check, electronic benefits transfer, and a full range of pre-paid products, including gift cards and loyalty programs. Our countertop solutions are available under the Vx solutions and NURIT brands. These electronic payment systems incorporate high performance 32-bit Acorn RISC Machines (ARM) microprocessors and have product line extensions targeted at the high-end countertop broadband and wireless solutions for financial retail, multi-lane retail, hospitality, government, and health care market segments. We design our products in a modular fashion to offer a wide range of options to our customers, including the ability to deploy new technologies at minimal cost as technology standards change. Our electronic payment systems are easily integrated with a full range of optional external devices, including secure PIN pads, check imaging equipment, barcode readers, contactless/RFID readers, and biometric devices. Our secure PIN pads support credit and debit transactions, as well as a wide range of applications that are either built into electronic payment systems or connect to electronic cash registers (ECRs) and POS systems. In addition, we offer an array of certified software applications and application libraries that enable our countertop systems and secure PIN pads to interface with major ECR and POS systems.
We offer a line of wireless system solutions that support IP-based CDMA, GPRS, and Wi-Fi technologies for secure, always on connectivity. In addition, we have added a Bluetooth communications solution to our portfolio of wireless payment systems. We expect that market opportunities for wireless solutions will continue to be found in developing countries where wireless telecommunications networks are being deployed at a much faster rate than wireline networks. We have leveraged our wireless system expertise to enter into new markets for electronic payment solutions such as the emerging pay-at-the-table market solutions for full-service restaurants and systems for transportation and delivery segments where merchants and consumers are demanding secure payment systems to reduce fraud and identity theft.
We offer a line of products specifically designed for consumer-activated functionality at the point of sale. These products include large, easy-to-read displays, user-friendly interfaces, ECR interfaces, durable key pads, signature capture functionality, and other features that are important to serving customers in a multi-lane retail environment. For example, our signature capture devices automatically store signatures and transaction data for fast recall, and the signature image is time stamped for fraud prevention. Our consumer-activated system solutions also enable merchants to display advertising, promotional content, loyalty program information, and electronic forms in order to market products and services to consumers at the point of sale. We have extended our product portfolio to support these same features into the unattended market segments such as parking, ticketing, vending machines, gas pumps, self-checkout, and QSR markets.
We offer a variety of contactless/NFC payment solutions across multiple product lines, specifically designed for consumer-activated transactions utilizing contactless cards, tokens, or NFC enabled mobile phones. These product solutions include integrated, modular, and stand alone contactless readers for both indoor and outdoor payment system solutions. Our contactless payment solutions are certified in accordance with industry standards
maintained by EMVCo LLC and major card associations, including Visa, MasterCard, American Express and Discover Financial Services. In addition, we have adapted several of these contactless payment systems to include acceptance of regional contactless card solutions required by our customers.
Our family of products for petroleum companies consists of integrated electronic payment systems that combine card processing, fuel dispensing, and ECR functions, as well as secure payment systems for integration with leading petroleum pump controllers and systems. These products are designed to meet the needs of petroleum company operations, where rapid consumer turnaround, easy pump control, and accurate record keeping are imperative. These products allow our petroleum company customers to manage fuel dispensing and control and enable pay at the pump functionality, cashiering, store management, inventory management, and accounting for goods and services at the point of sale. They are compatible with a wide range of fuel pumps, allowing retail petroleum outlets to integrate our systems easily at most locations. We have recently expanded this suite of products to add a range of high security unattended devices and related software products targeted at integration with the petroleum pumps in domestic and international markets.
Our server-based transaction products enable merchants to integrate advanced payment functionality into PC-based and other retail systems seamlessly. These products handle all of the business logic steps related to an electronic payment transaction (credit, debit, gift, and loyalty), including collection of payment-related information from the consumer and merchant, and communication with payment processors for authorization and settlement. Our products also enable the functionality of peripherals that connect to PC-based electronic payment systems, including consumer-activated products such as secure PIN pads and signature capture devices. The PayWare software product line we acquired from Trintech Group PLC in September 2006 has augmented our server-based, enterprise payment software solutions. The combined PayWare suite of products now includes card acceptance/merchant acquiring solutions (PCCharge, Payware PC, Payware Merchant, Payware Transact), POS Integration Software (Payware Link and Payware Link LE), Value Added Payment Solutions (Payware Gift and Payware Prepay) and Card Management Systems for Issuers and Acquirers (Payware CMS).
Unattended and Self-Service Payments
We offer a line of secure payment hardware and software integration modules designed to enable self-service solutions such as vending machines, ticketing kiosks, petroleum dispensers, public transportation turnstiles and buses, self-checkout, bill payment, and photo finishing kiosks to securely begin accepting magnetic stripe, EMV chipcard and/or contactless/NFC payment schemes. Our solutions leverage our widely adopted Vx and MX Solutions security architecture, developer tools and an extensive developer network enabling our global customer base to leverage existing certified payment applications or easily provide customized solutions for unique unattended environments. Designed for both indoor and outdoor use in harsh environments, these components are easily integrated with existing self-service solutions and are used to securely segregate payment processing from the system of the host device.
Cardholder Data Security
We recently introduced a powerful and unique solution to protect sensitive consumer magnetic stripe data captured from credit and debit cards at the point of sale. This solution, VeriShield Protect, encrypts consumer card data at the moment it is swiped, before it enters the retailers point of sale system and maintains that protection until it is outside of the merchants infrastructure, effectively shielding the merchant from access to detailed consumer data. VeriShield Protect employs proprietary technology designed to mask the encrypted data in a manner that does not require changes to currently installed point of sales systems and applications, making adoption of this highly secure solution simple and cost effective for merchants. VeriShield Protect aids retailers in achieving certification for data security standards set forth by the PCI SSC, also adding an additional layer of
protection not currently mandated by performing end-to-end encryption using proven secure Tamper Resistant Security Module (TRSM) technology commonly used today to protect consumer PINs at ATMs and POS devices. VeriShield Protect is currently available on our Vx and MX Solutions product lines.
We support our installed base by providing payment system consulting, deployment, on-site and telephone-based installation and training, 24-hour help desk support, repairs, replacement of impaired system solutions, asset tracking, and reporting. We provide a single source of comprehensive management services providing support primarily for our own system solutions in most vertical markets. Our services address many system configurations, including local area networks, leased-line, and dial-up environments. We also offer customized service programs for specific vertical markets in addition to standardized service plans.
Customized Application Development
We provide specific project management services for large turn-key application implementations. Our project management services include all phases of implementation, including customized software development, procurement, vendor coordination, site preparation, training, installation, follow-on support, and legacy system disposal. We also offer customer education programs as well as consulting services regarding selection of product and payment methodologies and strategies such as debit implementation. We believe that our client services are distinguished by our ability to perform mass customizations for large customers quickly and efficiently.
We have developed the following core technologies that are essential to the creation, delivery, and management of our system solutions. We believe these technologies are central to our leadership position in the electronic payment solutions industry.
Our secure, multi-tasking, multi-application platform architecture consists of an ARM System-on-Chip, our proprietary operating systems, proprietary security system, multi-application support, and file authentication technology. The combination of these technologies provides an innovative memory protection and separation scheme to ensure a robust and secure operating environment, enabling the download and execution of multiple applications on an electronic payment system without the need for recertification.
Our operating environment and modular design provide a consistent and intuitive user interface for third-party applications as well as our own. We believe our platform design enables our customers to deliver and manage multi-application payment systems in a timely, secure, and cost-effective manner. We continue to enhance and extend the capabilities of our platform to meet the growing demands of our customers for secure multi-application payment systems.
Our consumer-activated and unattended payment system solutions also incorporate a commercial Linux operating system that we have customized to include security, application resources, and data communication capabilities required in these payment systems. The Linux operating system was chosen for functionality, adaptability, and robustness as well as the readily available development tools for graphical user interface and multi-media content applications.
Libraries and Development Tools
We believe that by delivering a broad portfolio of application libraries and development tools to our large community of internal and third-party application developers, we are able to significantly reduce the time to
obtain certification for our system solutions. We provide a set of application libraries, or programming modules such as smart card interfaces, networking and wireless control protocol/internet protocol communications (TCP/IP) and secure socket layer (SSL) that have defined programming interfaces, which facilitate the timely and consistent implementation of our multi-application system solutions. Further, we maintain a high level of application compatibility across platforms, facilitating the migration of applications to future system solutions.
We also provide developer tool kits that contain industry standard visual development environments (C/C++) along with platform-specific compilers and debuggers. We provide numerous support services for our application development communities, including Developer Training, a dedicated developers support team, and VeriFone DevNet, an online developers portal that provides registered developers access to libraries, tools, programming guides, and support. Our libraries, tool kits, training, and support systems facilitate the rapid growth in deployment of third-party, value-added applications for our system solutions.
We believe that this growing portfolio of value-added applications increases the attractiveness of our solutions to global financial institutions and payment processors. In the highly competitive transaction processing market, these institutions are looking for ways to differentiate their solutions by adding additional services beyond credit and debit transaction processing. These value-added applications provide this differentiation and also provide a way to increase merchant retention and revenue for these channels.
Our SoftPay application framework contains a comprehensive set of pre-certified software modules enabling rapid configuration and delivery of merchant-ready applications for payment processors and financial institutions. We have configured SoftPay for use in a broad range of vertical markets including retail, restaurants, lodging, and rental services. SoftPay supports our comprehensive range of wireline and wireless IP communications options, including Ethernet, CDMA, GPRS, and Wi-Fi.
Remote Management System
Effective remote management is essential to cost effective deployment and maintenance of electronic payment systems. Our VeriCentre and NURIT Control Center systems provide broad remote management functionality for our system solutions, including software downloads, application management, remote diagnostics, and information reporting. In addition, we have developed a solution for managing the multi-media content, signature capture/storage/retrieval, and device management of our multi-media capable, consumer-activated Mx product line. Our management system licensees are responsible for the implementation, maintenance, and operation of the system. In certain markets and with certain customers, we maintain and manage the system to provide remote management services directly to customers. In addition, message management functionality allows financial institutions and payment processors to send customized text and graphics messages to any or all of their Verix, NURIT, Secura, or Mx terminal based merchants, and receive pre-formatted responses.
Our customers include financial institutions, payment processors, petroleum companies, large retailers, government organizations, and healthcare companies, as well as ISOs, which re-sell our system solutions to small merchants. In North America, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, approximately 37% of our sales were via ISOs, distributors, resellers, and system integrators, approximately 58% were direct sales to petroleum companies, retailers, and government-sponsored payment processors, and the remainder were to non-government-sponsored payment processors and financial institutions. Internationally, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, approximately 34% of our sales were via distributors, resellers, and system integrators and the remaining 66% were direct sales to financial institutions, payment processors, and major retailers.
The percentage of net revenues from our ten largest customers is as follows:
For the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, no one customer accounted for more than 10% of net revenues.
Sales and Marketing
Our North American sales teams are focused specifically on financial institutions, payment processors, third-party distributors, and value-added resellers, and on specific vertical markets, such as petroleum, multi-lane retail, restaurants, bank branches, self-service kiosks, government, and healthcare. Typically, each sales team includes a general manager or managing director, account representatives, business development personnel, sales engineers, and customer service representatives with specific vertical market expertise. The sales teams are supported by client services, manufacturing, and product development teams to deliver products and services that meet the needs of our diverse customer base.
Our marketing group is responsible for product management, account management, program marketing, and corporate communications. Our product management group analyzes and identifies product and technology trends in the marketplace and works closely with our research and development group to develop new products and enhancements. Our program marketing function promotes adoption of our branded solutions through initiatives such as our Value-Added Partner (VAP) Program. Our corporate communications function coordinates key market messaging across regions, including public relations and go-to-market product campaigns.
As of October 31, 2009, we had 342 sales and marketing employees, representing approximately 15% of our total workforce.
Our VAP Program provides a technical, operational, and marketing environment for third-party developers to leverage our distribution channels to sell value-added applications and services. As of October 31, 2009, over 37 third-party developers, or partners, in our VAP Program have provided solutions for pre-paid cards, gift cards, and loyalty cards and age verification services, among others. Through the program, merchants obtain seamless access to value-added applications, allowing them to differentiate their offerings without a costly product development cycle.
Global Outsourcing and Manufacturing Operations
Prior to our Lipman acquisition in November 2006, we outsourced 100% of our product manufacturing to providers in the Electronic Manufacturing Services (EMS) industry. This work was outsourced to Jabil Circuit, Inc., Sanmina-SCI Corporation, and Inventec Appliances Corporation. We have enabled direct shipment capability for several product lines from our EMS providers to our customers in various countries around the world. NURIT branded products that were acquired as part of our Lipman acquisition are built in VeriFones in-house manufacturing facility located in Tel Aviv, Israel. We are currently in the process of outsourcing this in-house manufacturing to Sanmina-SCI Corporation and expect that 100% of our product manufacturing will be outsourced following the transition of the manufacturing of our NURIT products to Sanmina-SCI Corporation.
Our principal competitors in the market for electronic payment systems and services are Ingenico S.A. and Hypercom Corporation, the two other large providers of payment systems. We also compete with First Data
Corporation, Gemalto N.V., Gilbarco, Inc., a subsidiary of Danaher Corporation, International Business Machines Corporation, MICROS Systems, Inc., NCR Corporation and Radiant Systems, Inc. We compete primarily on the basis of the following factors: trusted brand, end-to-end system solutions, product certifications, value-added applications and advanced product features, advanced communications modularity, reliability, supply chain scale/flexibility and low total cost of ownership.
We expect competition in our industry will be largely driven by the requirements to respond to increasingly complex technology, industry certifications, and security standards. We also see continued emphasis on consolidation among suppliers as evidenced by the Ingenico S.A./SAGEM Monetel merger and the acquisition by Hypercom of Thales e-Transactions, as the scale advantages related to research and development investment, volume purchasing power, and sales/technical support infrastructure continue to put pressure on smaller companies in our industry. In addition, First Data Corporation, a leading provider of payment processing services and one of our largest customers, has developed and continues to develop a series of proprietary electronic payment systems for the U.S. market.
Research and Development
We work with our customers to develop system solutions that address existing and anticipated end-user needs. Our development activities are distributed globally and managed primarily from the U.S. We utilize regional application development capabilities in locations where labor costs are lower than in the United States and where regional expertise can be leveraged for our target markets in Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Our regional application development centers provide customization and adaptation to meet the needs of customers in local markets. Our modular designs enable us to customize existing systems in order to meet customer requirements, shorten development cycles and reduce time to market.
Our research and development goals include:
Our research and development expenses were $65.1 million, $75.6 million and $65.4 million for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. Research and development expenses as a percentage of net revenues were 7.7%, 8.2%, and 7.2% for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively. As of October 31, 2009, we had 816 research and development employees representing approximately 36% of our total workforce.
Industry Standards and Government Regulations
In order to offer products that connect to payment networks, electronic payment system providers must certify their products and services with card associations, financial institutions, and payment processors, as well as comply with government and telecommunications company regulations.
We have gained an in-depth knowledge of certification requirements and processes by working closely with card associations, payment processors, security organizations, and international regulatory organizations to certify our new products. We accelerate this certification process by leveraging our platform architectures, user interface, and core technologies.
We employ a group of engineers who specialize in security design methodologies. This group is responsible for designing and integrating security measures in our system solutions and conducts early design reviews with independent security lab consultants to ensure compliance of our electronic payment system designs with worldwide security standards.
Regulatory certifications are addressed by our compliance engineering department, which is staffed by electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) safety, telecommunications, and wireless carrier certification experts.
We actively participate in electronic payment industry working groups that help develop market standards. Our personnel are members of several working groups of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a private, non-profit organization that administrates and coordinates voluntary standardization in the U.S. and the Industry Standards Organization which contains working groups responsible for international security standards. They have leadership roles on subcommittees that develop standards in such areas as financial transactions, data security, smart cards, and the petroleum industry.
We also are subject to other legal and regulatory requirements, including the European Unions (EU) Restriction on Hazardous Substances (RoHS) Directive and the European Union Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), which are designed to restrict the use of certain hazardous substances in finished goods and require active steps to promote recycling of components to limit the total quantity of waste going to final disposal.
In March 2007, VeriFone achieved compliance with the Administrative Measures on the Control of Pollution Caused by Electronic Information Products, commonly referred to as China RoHS regulations, as required by Chinas Ministry of Information Industry. Similar to the EU RoHS Directive, the China regulations restrict the importation into and production within China of electrical equipment containing certain hazardous materials.
We believe we have taken all necessary steps to ensure all newly finished goods shipping into EU, China, and U.S. markets were fully compliant with regional or country specific environmental legislation. We are also working diligently with local business representatives and/or customers on the various local WEEE compliance strategies, including WEEE registration, collection, reporting and recycling schemes.
We are also subject to the following standards and requirements:
Industry and government security standards ensure the integrity of the electronic payment process and protect the privacy of consumers using electronic payment systems. New standards are continually being adopted or proposed as a result of worldwide fraud prevention initiatives, increasing the need for new security solutions and technologies. In order for us to remain compliant with the growing variety of international requirements, we have developed a security architecture that incorporates physical, electronic, operating system, encryption, and application-level security measures. This architecture has proven successful even in countries that have particularly stringent and specific security requirements, such as Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.
Card Association Standards
Payment Card Industry Security Standards. In September 2006, the PCI SSC was formed by American Express, Discover Financial Services, JCB, MasterCard, and Visa. PCI SSC is responsible for developing and disseminating security specifications, validation of testing methods and security assessor training. The five founding companies participate on the policy setting Executive Committee of the PCI SSC.
In September 2006, the PCI SSC published an updated version of the PCI-DSS that represents a common set of industry tools and measurements to help ensure the safe handling of sensitive electronic transaction information. In October 2008, the PCI-DSS standard was updated and an expiration date for the previous version of this standard was set. The PCI SSC also released an updated version of the newer PA-DSS standard and set an expiration date for the original standard adopted in April 2008 by Visa under the Payment Application Best Practices (PABP) program. The PCI-DSS and PA-DSS standard revisions include mandates and audit requirements for retailers, merchant acquirers, and payment application developers.
In September 2007, the PCI SSC announced that the PCI PED standard will be moved under the control of the PCI SSC. This PCI PED standard was previously maintained and updated by Visa, MasterCard, and JCB. The PCI PED specification and testing requirements have become a standard specification for the five card associations. All previous mandates and deadlines regarding PCI PED compliance will remain in effect under the PCI SSC. Further alignment with regional and national debit networks and certification bodies may occur, which would enable electronic payment system providers to certify payment technology more quickly and cost effectively. In practice, the PCI PED approval process represents a significant increase in level of security and technical complexity for PIN Entry Devices. In April 2009, the PCI SSC announced the expansion of the PCI PED requirements program to include two new types of devices, unattended payment terminals (UPT) and hardware security modules (HSM).
EMV Standards. EMV has introduced new standards to address the growing need for transaction security and interoperability. One important example is their establishment of EMVCo LLC, a smart card standards organization operated by American Express, MasterCard, Visa and JCB that has prescribed specifications for electronic payment systems to receive certifications for smart card devices and applications. The EMV standards are designed to ensure global smart card interoperability across all electronic payment systems. To ensure adherence to this standard, specific certifications are required for all electronic payment systems and their application software. We maintain EMV certifications across our applicable product lines.
Contactless System Standards. The major card associations have each established a brand around contactless payment. The brands and specifications are PayPass® for MasterCard, Visa payWave® and Visa Wave® for Visa, ExpressPay® for American Express, and ZIP® for Discover Financial Services , and J/speedy for JCB. Along with these brands, each of the card associations has developed its own specifications governing its brands user experience, data management, the card-to-reader protocols and in at least one case the protocol between the contactless reader and the host device. Each brand of contactless payment has a complete set of specifications, certification requirements and a very controlled testing and approval process. In order to access the specification and approval process, payment system manufacturers must become licensees of the relevant card associations specification. Although all of the specifications are based on ISO-IEC 14443, a standard developed by the International Organization for Standardization, the application approval processes are not compatible with one another. MasterCard has assigned its PayPass® contactless implementation specifications to EMVCo LLC, which was the first step towards the creation of a common specification and certification standard for contactless payment systems. The EMVCo LLC Contactless protocol testing process has also been put in place. VeriFone actively participates in several standards bodies pursuing common standards for contactless payments, including INCITS B10, EMVCo LLC, the Smart Card Alliance and the NFC Forum.
MasterCard PTS and TQM Standard. The MasterCard POS Terminal Security (PTS) Program addresses stability and security of IP communications between IP-enabled POS terminals and the acquirer host system using authentication/encryption protocols approved by MasterCard ensuring transaction data integrity. The purpose of this program is threefold:
We have successfully achieved Vx product-line and NURIT product-line compliance with the new MasterCard PTS security specification regarding security of IP-based systems. The MasterCard PTS program approval applies to several IP-enabled products including the Vx 510, Vx 570, Vx 610, Vx 670, and Vx 810 as well as the NURIT 8000, NURIT 8210, and NURIT 8400 payment systems. We are the first terminal vendor to achieve such a distinction across an entire product line.
The MasterCard Terminal Quality Management (TQM) program was created in 2003 to help ensure the quality and reliability of EMV compliant terminals worldwide. MasterCards TQM program validates the entire lifecycle of the product, from design to manufacturing and deployment. This is a hardware quality management program, on top of the EMV Level 1 certification. It mainly involves the review and audit of the vendors process in the different phases of implementation, manufacturing, and distribution. At the end of the process, the product is given a quality label. MasterCard has mandated the quality label to all their member banks and has made it a pre-requisite for their Terminal Integration Process (TIP) since December 2003. We maintain TQM approval across all EMV Level 1 approved products deployed with EMV applications. The TQM program is now extended to Contactless payment systems and is a requirement for achieving a full PayPass Approval with MasterCard.
Payment Processor/Financial Institution Requirements
U.S. payment processors have two types of certification levels, Class A and Class B. Class B certification ensures that an electronic payment system adheres to the payment processors basic functional and network requirements. Class A certification adds another stipulation that the processor actively supports the electronic payment system on its internal help desk systems. Attainment of Class A certification, which may take up to twelve months, requires working with each payment processor to pass extensive functional and end-user testing and to establish the help desk related infrastructure necessary to provide Class A support. Attaining Class A certifications increases the number of payment processors that may actively sell and deploy a particular electronic payment system. We have significant experience in attaining these critical payment processor certifications and have a large portfolio of Class A certifications with major U.S. processors. In addition, several international financial institutions and payment processors have certification requirements that electronic payment systems must comply with in order to process transactions on their specific networks. We have significant direct experience and, through our international distributors, indirect experience in attaining these required certifications across the broad range of system solutions that we offer to our international customers.
Telecommunications Regulatory Authority and Carrier Requirements
Our products must comply with government regulations, including those imposed by the Federal Communications Commission and similar telecommunications authorities worldwide regarding emissions, radiation, safety, and connections with telephone lines and radio networks. Our products must also comply with recommendations of quasi-regulatory authorities and of standards-setting committees. Our electronic payment systems have been certified as compliant with a large number of national requirements, including those of the Federal Communications Commission and Underwriters Laboratory in the U.S. and similar local requirements in other countries.
In addition to national requirements for telecommunications systems, wireless network service providers mandate certain standards with which all connected devices and systems must comply in order to operate on these networks. Many wireless network carriers have their own certification process for devices to be activated and used on their networks. Our wireless electronic payment systems have been certified by leading wireless carrier networks around the world.
We rely primarily on copyrights, trademarks, patent filings, and trade secret laws to establish and maintain our proprietary rights in our technology and products. VeriFone maintains a patent incentive program and patent committee, which encourages and rewards employees to present inventions for patent application and filings.
As of October 31, 2009, we held 33 patents and have 37 patent applications filed with various patent offices in several countries throughout the world, including the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union, China, Israel, India, Australia, Japan, Germany, France, Ireland, Hong Kong and South Africa.
As of October 31, 2009, we held trademark registration in approximately 30 countries for VERIFONE and in approximately 40 countries for VERIFONE including our ribbon logo. We currently hold trademark registration in the United States and a variety of other countries for our product names and other marks.
We generally have not registered copyrights in our software and other written works. Instead, we have relied upon common law copyright, customer license agreements, and other forms of protection. We use non-disclosure agreements and license agreements to protect software and other written materials as copyrighted and/or trade secrets.
In the U.S. and other countries, prior to 2001, our predecessor held patents relating to a variety of POS and related inventions, which expire in accordance with the applicable law in the country where filed. In 2001, as part of the divestiture of VeriFone, Inc. from HP, VeriFone, Inc. and HP entered into a technology agreement whereby HP retained ownership of most of the patents owned or applied for by VeriFone prior to the date of divestiture. The technology agreement grants VeriFone a perpetual, non-exclusive license to use any of the patented technology retained by HP at no charge. In addition, we hold a non-exclusive license to patents held by NCR Corporation related to signature capture in electronic payment systems. This license expires in 2011, along with the underlying patents.
Segment and Geographical Information
For an analysis of financial information about geographic areas as well as our segments, see Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Segment Information and Note 15. Segment and Geographic Information of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included herein.
As of October 31, 2009, we have 2,249 employees worldwide. None of our employees is represented by a labor union agreement or collective bargaining agreement. We have not experienced any work stoppages and we believe that our employee relations are good.
The executive officers of VeriFone and their ages as of December 22, 2009 are as follows:
Douglas G. Bergeron. Mr. Bergeron has served as Chief Executive Officer and a director of VeriFone Holdings, Inc. since its formation in July 2002 and of VeriFone, Inc. since July 2001. From December 2000 to June 2002, Mr. Bergeron was Group President of Gores Technology Group and, from April 1999 to October 2000 served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Geac Computer Corporation. From 1990 to 1999, Mr. Bergeron served in a variety of executive management positions at SunGard Data Systems Inc., including Group CEO of SunGard Brokerage Systems Group and President of SunGard Futures Systems. Mr. Bergeron holds a Bachelor of Arts degree (with Honors) in computer science from York University in Toronto, Canada, and a Masters of Science degree from the University of Southern California. Mr. Bergeron also serves on the board of directors of Merriman Curhan Ford Group, Inc., a financial services holding company, and is a member of the Listed Company Advisory Committee of the NYSE Euronext (the NYSE).
Robert Dykes. Mr. Dykes has served as Senior Vice President since September 2, 2008 and as Chief Financial Officer since September 9, 2008. Prior to joining VeriFone, Mr. Dykes was Chairman and CEO of NebuAd Inc., a provider of targeted online advertising networks. Before joining NebuAd, from January 2005 to March 2007, Mr. Dykes was Executive Vice President, Business Operations and Chief Financial Officer of Juniper Networks, Inc., a provider of network infrastructure to global service providers, enterprises, governments and research and educational institutions. From February 1997 to December 2004, Mr. Dykes was Chief Financial Officer and President, Systems Group, of Flextronics International Ltd., a provider of design and electronics manufacturing services to original equipment manufacturers. From October 1988 to February 1997, Mr. Dykes was Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations and Chief Financial Officer of Symantec Corporation, a provider of software and services that address risks to information security, availability, compliance, and information technology systems performance. Mr. Dykes also held Chief Financial Officer roles at industrial robots manufacturer Adept Technology and senior financial management positions at Ford Motor Company and at disc drive controller manufacturer Xebec. Mr. Dykes holds a Bachelor of Commerce in Administration degree from Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Elmore Waller. Mr. Waller has served as Executive Vice President, Integrated Solutions since December 2004 and, since joining VeriFone in 1986, has served in a number of leadership positions including Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Worldwide Petro Division. Prior to working at VeriFone, Mr. Waller worked for 11 years at General Electric Company, serving in several financial management positions. Mr. Waller holds an M.B.A. from Syracuse University.
Jeff Dumbrell. Mr. Dumbrell joined VeriFone in July 2002 where he served in various senior-level management roles within the company, most recently as Executive Vice President responsible for managing VeriFones growth initiatives in the United States, Canada, Northern Europe, Middle East and Africa. From December 2000 to July 2002, Mr. Dumbrell was Executive Director of Sales for B3 Corporation and he was National Sales Manager for BankServ from October 1999 to December 2000. Previously, Mr. Dumbrell was Western Regional Manager for The Quaker Oats Company where he had sales responsibility for managing Tier 1 retail customers. Mr. Dumbrell holds a M.B.A. from The University of San Francisco and a Bachelor of Science in Marketing from Clemson University.
Eliezer Yanay. Mr. Yanay serves as President of VeriFone Israel and Executive Vice President, Continental Europe, South East Europe and Asia and is responsible for VeriFones operations and manufacturing in Israel, as well as business development, sales and marketing in Continental Europe, South East Europe and Asia. From November 2006 to March 2009, Mr. Yanay served as President of VeriFone Israel and Managing Director of Middle East. Mr. Yanay joined VeriFone following its acquisition of Lipman Electronic Engineering in November 2006. Mr. Yanay had served at Lipman as Executive Vice President of Sales and Marketing since September 2001 where his responsibilities included management of worldwide sales and marketing activities, management of the corporate sales and marketing department and oversight of Lipmans non-U.S. subsidiaries. Before joining Lipman, Mr. Yanay held various senior-level positions at Shira Computers Ltd. (a subsidiary of VYYO Inc.) and Scitex Corporation, Ltd. Mr. Yanay holds a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology from Tel Aviv University.
Our Internet address is http://www.verifone.com. We make available free of charge on our investor relations website under SEC Filings our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, registration statements and amendments to those reports and registration statements as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding our filings at http://www.sec.gov. A copy of any materials we file with the SEC also may be read and copied at the SECs Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, D.C. 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room can be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
The risks set forth below may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and operating results. In addition to the risks set forth below and the factors affecting specific business operations identified with the description of these operations elsewhere in this report, there may also be risks of which we are currently aware, or that we currently regard as immaterial based on the information available to us that later prove to be material.
Risks Related to Our Business
Our internal processes and controls and our disclosure controls have been inadequate; if the processes and controls we have implemented and continue to implement are inadequate, we may not be able to comply with our financial statement certification requirements under applicable SEC rules, or prevent future errors in our financial reporting.
As described under Item 9A Controls and Procedures in this Annual Report and under Item 4 Controls and Procedures in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q for the periods ended January 31, April 30 and July 31, 2009, our internal processes and controls have been inadequate because we have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and we have determined that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective. These weaknesses, such as weakness in control activities related to income taxes and financial statement review processes and having insufficient number of qualified finance personnel, contributed to our need to restate previously reported interim financial information for each of the first three quarters of our fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, and to the delays in the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal year 2007. We also were unable to file our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q for our fiscal quarters ended January 31, 2008 and April 30, 2008 on a timely basis. We have implemented and intend to continue to implement a number of additional and enhanced processes and controls to improve our internal control over financial reporting. However, as of October 31, 2009, we have not yet remediated weakness in control activities related to income taxes. If we are unsuccessful in adequately implementing these processes and controls, we may be unable to comply with Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15, which specify the processes and controls that public companies are required to have in place, and we may be unable to provide the executive certificates required by Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 in our quarterly and annual reports. Even if we implement such controls, there can be no assurance that these controls will be sufficient to detect or prevent future errors in financial reporting. We have devoted additional resources to our financial control and reporting requirements, including hiring additional qualified employees in these areas. We expect to hire additional employees and may also engage additional consultants in these areas. Competition for qualified financial control and accounting professionals in the geographic areas in which we operate is keen and there can be no assurance that we will be able to hire and retain these individuals.
If current macroeconomic conditions persist or worsen, our business and results of operations could be further adversely affected.
The U.S. and international economy and financial markets have experienced significant slowdown and volatility due to uncertainties related to energy prices, availability of credit, difficulties in the banking and financial services sectors, softness in the housing, retail and consumer markets, severely diminished market liquidity, geopolitical conflicts, falling consumer confidence and rising unemployment rates. This slowdown has and could further lead to reduced demand for our products if customers decide to delay or reduce deployment of electronic payment systems, which in turn would reduce our revenues and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In particular, the slowdown and volatility in the global markets have resulted in softer demand in the financial and retail sectors, pricing pressures and more conservative purchasing decisions by customers, including a tendency toward lower-priced products and lower volume of purchases, which could negatively impact our revenues, gross margins and results of operations. In some countries where we do business, the weakened economy has lead to economic instability which has negatively affected sales, an example of which is decreased purchasing power due to currency devaluations. In addition to a reduction in sales, our profitability
may decrease during downturns because we may not be able to reduce costs at the same rate as our sales decline. Given the current unfavorable economic environment, our customers may have difficulties obtaining capital at adequate or historical levels to finance their ongoing business and operations, which could impair their ability to make timely payments to us.
We are unable to predict the likely duration and severity of the current disruption in the financial markets and adverse economic conditions in the U.S. and other countries and such conditions, if they persist or worsen, will further adversely impact our business, operating results, and financial condition. While some markets have shown signs of improvement and we have experienced modest sequential growth in revenues and earnings in recent quarters, we cannot predict whether such improvements or growth will continue and any future decline in global conditions could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition. Continued volatility in market conditions make it difficult to forecast earnings and if we fail to meet our financial guidance or the expectations of investment analysts or investors in any period, the market price of our common stock could decline.
We depend on a limited number of customers, including distributors and resellers, for a large percentage of our System Solutions sales. If we do not effectively manage our relationships with them, our net revenues and operating results will suffer.
A significant percentage of our net revenues are attributable to a limited number of customers, including distributors and ISOs. For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 31.8% of our net revenues. Although no individual customer accounted for more than 10% of net revenues in fiscal year 2009, three customers accounted for approximately 14.0% of our net revenues in that period. If any of our large customers significantly reduces or delays purchases from us or if we are required to sell products to them at reduced prices or on other terms less favorable to us, our revenues and income could be materially adversely affected.
We sell a significant portion of our solutions through third parties such as independent distributors, independent sales organizations, or ISOs, value-added resellers, and payment processors. We depend on their active marketing and sales efforts. These third parties also provide after-sales support and related services to end user customers. When we introduce new applications and solutions, they also provide critical support for developing and supporting the custom software applications to run on our various electronic payment systems and, internationally, in obtaining requisite certifications in the markets in which they are active. Accordingly, the pace at which we are able to introduce new solutions in markets in which these parties are active depends on the resources they dedicate to these tasks. Moreover, our arrangements with these third parties typically do not prevent them from selling products of other companies, including our competitors, and they may elect to market our competitors products and services in preference to our system solutions. If one or more of our major resellers terminates or otherwise adversely changes its relationship with us, we may be unsuccessful in replacing it. The loss of one of our major resellers could impair our ability to sell our solutions and result in lower revenues and income. It could also be time consuming and expensive to replicate, either directly or through other resellers, the certifications and the custom applications owned by these third parties.
A majority of our net revenues is generated outside of the United States and we intend to continue to expand our operations internationally. Our results of operations could suffer if we are unable to manage our international expansion and operations effectively.
During the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009 and 2008, approximately 63.6% and 65.2%, respectively, of our net revenues were generated outside of the United States. We expect our percentage of net revenues generated outside of the United States to increase in the coming years. Part of our strategy is to expand our penetration in existing foreign markets and to enter new foreign markets and in particular to enter new emerging markets. Our ability to penetrate some international markets may be limited due to different technical standards, protocols or product requirements. Expansion of our international business will require significant management
attention and financial resources. Our international net revenues will depend on our continued success in the following areas:
In addition, we are subject to risks associated with operating in foreign countries, including:
Many of these factors typically become more prevalent during periods of economic stress; therefore, current global economic differences may exacerbate certain of these risks. For example, we are subject to foreign currency risk and economic and political instability which can lead to significant and unpredictable volatility in currency rates, including significant currency devaluations, which may negatively impact our revenues, gross margins, results of operations and financial position. Although we engage in some hedging of our foreign currency exposures, we do not hedge all such exposures and our hedging arrangements may not always be effective. See Foreign Currency Risk under Part II Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk in this Form 10-K. In addition, compliance with foreign and U.S. laws and regulations that are applicable to our international operations is complex and may increase our cost of doing business in international jurisdictions and our international operations could expose us to fines and penalties if we fail to comply with these regulations. These laws and regulations include import and export requirements, exchange control regulations, U.S. laws such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and local laws prohibiting corrupt payments to governmental officials. Although we have implemented policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with these laws, there can be no assurance that our employees, contractors, and agents will not take actions in violation of our policies, particularly as we expand our operations through organic growth and acquisitions. For example, two of our Brazilian subsidiaries that were acquired as a part of the Lipman
acquisition have been notified of assessments regarding Brazilian customs penalties that relate to alleged infractions in the importation of goods. See Part I Item 3 Legal Proceedings of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any such violations could subject us to civil or criminal penalties, including the imposition of substantial fines and interest or prohibitions on our ability to offer our products and services to one or more countries, and could also materially damage our reputation, our brand, our international expansion efforts, our business, and negatively impact our operating results. In addition, if we fail to address the challenges and risks associated with international expansion and acquisition strategy, we may encounter difficulties implementing our strategy, which could impede our growth or harm our operating results.
A significant percentage of our business is executed towards the end of our fiscal quarters. This could negatively impact our business and results of operations.
Revenues recognized in our fiscal quarters tend to be back-end loaded. This means that sales orders are received, product is shipped, and revenue is recognized increasingly towards the end of each fiscal quarter. This back-end loading, particularly if it becomes more pronounced, could adversely affect our business and results of operations due to a number of factors including the following:
We are exposed to credit risk with some of our customers and to credit exposures and currency controls in weakened markets, which could result in material losses.
A significant portion of our sales are on an open credit basis, with typical payment terms of up to 60 days in the United States and, because of local customs or conditions, longer in some international markets. In the past, there have been bankruptcies among our customer base. Although credit losses have not been material to date, future losses, if incurred, could harm our business and have a materially adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. Also, certain customers who are invoiced in U.S. dollars, such as those based in Venezuela, have experienced and may continue to experience difficulties in obtaining U.S. dollar currency due to local currency controls, and therefore may not be able to remit timely payment to us. Additionally, to the degree that the recent turmoil in the credit markets makes it more difficult for some customers to obtain financing or access U.S. dollar currency, our customers ability to pay could be adversely impacted, which in turn could have a material adverse impact on our business, cash flows, operating results and financial condition.
Fluctuations in currency exchange rates may adversely affect our results of operations.
A substantial portion of our business consists of sales made to customers outside the United States. A portion of the net revenues we receive from such sales is denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Additionally, portions of our cost of net revenues and our other operating expenses are incurred by our International operations and denominated in local currencies. Fluctuations in the value of these net revenues,
costs and expenses as measured in U.S. dollars have affected our results of operations historically, and adverse currency exchange rate fluctuations may have a material impact in the future. Further, changes in exchange rates that strengthen the U.S. dollar could increase the price of our products in the local currencies of the foreign markets we serve. This would result in making our products relatively more expensive than products that are denominated in local currencies, leading to a reduction in sales and profitability in those foreign markets. In addition, our balance sheet reflects non-U.S. dollar denominated assets and liabilities, primarily intercompany balances, which can be adversely affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates and cause gains and losses that are included in other income (expense), net in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. We have entered into foreign exchange forward contracts and other arrangements intended to hedge our balance sheet exposure to adverse fluctuations in exchange rates. We have also effectively priced our System Solutions in U.S. dollars in certain countries. Nevertheless, these hedging arrangements may not always be effective, particularly in the event of imprecise forecasts of non-U.S. denominated assets and liabilities. Additionally, our efforts to effectively price products in U.S. dollars may have disadvantages since it may affect demand for our products if the local currency strengthens relative to the U.S. dollar. On the other hand, we could be adversely affected where the U.S. dollar strengthens relative to the local currency between the time of a sale and the time we receive payment, which would be collected in the devalued local currency. Accordingly, if there is an adverse movement in exchange rates, we might suffer significant losses and our results of operations may otherwise be adversely affected. Uncertainty in the global market conditions have resulted in and may continue to cause significant volatility in foreign currency exchange rates which could increase these risks. Additionally, hedging programs expose us to risks that could adversely affect our operating results, including the following:
We depend upon third parties to manufacture many of our systems and to supply the components necessary to manufacture our products.
We utilize a limited number of third parties to manufacture our hardware products pursuant to our specifications and rely upon these contract manufacturers to produce and deliver products to our customers on a timely basis and at an acceptable cost. Further, a majority of our manufacturing activities are concentrated in China. Disruptions to the business or operations of these contract manufacturers, or to their ability to produce the products we require in accordance with our and our customers requirements, and particularly disruptions to the manufacturing operations in China, could significantly affect our ability to fulfill customer demand on a timely basis which could materially harm our revenues and results of operations. Further, we expect to increase our use of contract manufacturers to manufacture our products which could exacerbate these risks, including the risk of disruptions related to our ability and the ability of our contract manufacturers to effectively accommodate the shift in production. Components such as application specific integrated circuits, or ASICs, payment processors, wireless modules, modems and printer mechanisms that are necessary to manufacture and assemble our systems are sourced either directly by us or on our behalf by our contract manufacturers from a variety of component suppliers selected by us. Certain of the components are specifically customized for use in our products and are obtained from sole source suppliers on a purchase order basis. In recent periods we have experienced a tightening in availability of certain semiconductor commodities that are necessary for the manufacture of our products. If our suppliers are unable or unwilling to deliver the quantities that we require, we would be faced with a shortage of critical components. We also experience from time to time an increase in the lead time for delivery of some of our key components. We may not be able to find alternative sources in a timely manner if suppliers of our key components become unwilling or unable to provide us with adequate supplies of these key components when we need them or if they increase their prices. If we are unable to obtain sufficient key required components, or to develop alternative sources if and as required in the future, or to replace our component and factory tooling for our products in a timely manner if they are damaged or destroyed, we could experience delays or reductions in
product shipments. This could harm our relationships with our customers and cause our revenues to decline. Even if we are able to secure alternative sources or replace our tooling in a timely manner, our costs could increase.
The government tax benefits that our subsidiaries currently receive require them to meet several conditions and may be terminated or reduced in the future, which could require us to pay increased taxes or refund tax benefits received in the past.
Our principal subsidiary in Israel (formerly Lipman) has received tax benefits under Israeli law for capital investments that are designated as Approved Enterprises. We received such tax benefits of approximately $0.4 million in 2009 and $8.0 million in 2008. Due to our restructuring and contract manufacturing arrangements entered into in fiscal 2010 we will no longer meet the requirements necessary to maintain the tax benefit status in Israel. Effective beginning November 1, 2009, we will be taxed at the full statutory rate in Israel and no future tax benefit will be recorded. Our principal subsidiary in Israel has undistributed earnings of approximately $179.2 million, the vast majority of which are attributable to Lipmans historic Approved Enterprise programs. As such, these earnings were not subject to Israeli statutory corporate tax at the time they were generated. To the extent that these earnings are distributed to the United States in the future, our Israeli subsidiary would be required to pay corporate tax at the rate ordinarily applicable to such earnings, currently between 12.5% and 36.25% which includes the withholding tax between the U.S. and Israel. We have accrued approximately $48.7 million for taxes associated with potential future distributions of our Israeli subsidiarys approximately $179.2 million in earnings.
Our principal subsidiary in Singapore has received tax benefits under the Singapore Pioneer Tax Holiday provision. We received such tax benefits of approximately $4.1 million in 2009 and $1.2 million in 2008. To maintain our eligibility for these benefits, we must meet certain agreed conditions, including maintaining agreed levels of Singapore employees and incurring and documenting total local business spend levels as agreed with the Singapore Economic Development Board. If the Company is not able to maintain the employment levels and total local business spend levels then all income in Singapore could be taxed at the statutory rate of 18% instead of the agreed Pioneer Tax Holiday rate of 0%. The Company is currently renegotiating terms and conditions for 2008 and subsequent years and expects to maintain its tax exempt status.
We have significant operations in Israel and therefore our results of operations may be adversely affected by political or economic instability or military operations in or around Israel.
We have offices and a manufacturing facility in Israel and many of our suppliers are located in Israel. Therefore, political, economic, and military conditions in Israel directly affect our operations. The future of peace efforts between Israel and its Arab neighbors remains uncertain. Any armed conflicts or further political instability in the region is likely to negatively affect business conditions and adversely affect our results of operations. Furthermore, several countries continue to restrict or ban business with Israel and Israeli companies. These restrictive laws and policies may seriously limit our ability to make sales in those countries.
In addition, many employees in Israel are obligated to perform at least 30 days and up to 40 days, depending on rank and position, of military reserve duty annually and are subject to being called for active duty under emergency circumstances. If a military conflict or war arises, these individuals could be required to serve in the military for extended periods of time. Our operations in Israel could be disrupted by the absence for a significant period of one or more key employees or a significant number of other employees due to military service. Any disruption in our operations in Israel could materially adversely affect our business.
We depend on our manufacturing and warehouse facility and contract manufacturing facility in Israel. If operations at these facilities are interrupted for any reason, there could be a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
We currently assemble and test a number of our product lines at our manufacturing facility located in Israel. Component and limited finished product inventories are also stored at this facility. As a result of our outsourcing decision, we are in the process of transferring our manufacturing of NURIT products to a contract manufacturer with operations in Israel. Disruption of the manufacturing process at this facility or at the facility of our contract manufacturer or damage to either of these facilities, whether as a result of fire, natural disaster, act of war, terrorist attack, or otherwise, could materially affect our ability to deliver products on a timely basis and could materially adversely affect our results of operations. We also assemble some of our products in Brazil. To the extent products are manufactured by third parties in additional countries, we may become more dependent on third-party manufacturers to produce and deliver products sold in these markets on a timely basis and at an acceptable cost.
We have experienced rapid growth in recent years, and if we cannot adequately manage our growth, our results of operations will suffer.
We have experienced rapid growth in recent years in our operations, both internally and from acquisitions. We cannot be sure that we have made adequate allowances for the costs and risks associated with our expansion, or that our systems, procedures, and managerial controls will be adequate to support further expansion in our operations. Any delay in implementing, or transitioning to, new or enhanced systems, procedures, or controls to accommodate the requirements of our business and operations may adversely affect our ability to manage our product inventory and record and report financial and management information on a timely and accurate basis. If we are unable to successfully manage expansion, our results of operations may be adversely affected.
Our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly as a result of factors outside of our control, which could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.
We expect our revenues and operating results to vary from quarter to quarter. As a consequence, our operating results in any single quarter may not meet the expectations of securities analysts and investors, which could cause the price of our common stock to decline. Factors that may affect our operating results include:
In particular, differences in relative growth rates between our businesses in North America and internationally may have a significant effect on our operating results, particularly our reported gross profit percentage, in any individual quarter, with International sales carrying lower margins.
In addition, we have in the past and may continue to experience periodic variations in sales to our key vertical and international markets. These periodic variations occur throughout the year and may lead to fluctuations in our quarterly operating results depending on the impact of any given market during that quarter and could lead to volatility in our stock price.
We are party to a number of lawsuits and we may be named in additional litigation, all of which are likely to require significant management time and attention and expenses and may result in an unfavorable outcome which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We are currently a party in several material litigation proceedings. For example, in connection with the restatements of our historical interim financial statements for fiscal year 2007, a number of securities class action complaints were filed against us and certain of our officers, and a number of purported derivative actions have also been filed against certain of our current and former directors and officers. For a description of our material pending litigation, please see Part I Item 3 Legal Proceedings of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The amount of time and resources required to resolve these lawsuits is unpredictable, and defending ourselves is likely to divert managements attention from the day-to-day operations of our business, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In addition, an unfavorable outcome in such litigation or a decision by us to settle such lawsuits to avoid the distraction and expense of continued litigation even if we deem the claims to be without merit would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Our insurance may not be sufficient to cover our costs for defending these actions or paying any damages in the event of an unfavorable outcome. In addition, we may be obligated to indemnify (and advance legal expenses to) both current and former officers, employees and directors in connection with the securities class action and derivative action matters. We currently hold insurance policies for the benefit of our directors and officers, although our insurance coverage may not be sufficient in some or all of these matters. Furthermore, our insurance carriers may seek to deny coverage in some or all of these matters, in which case we may have to fund the indemnification amounts owed to such directors and officers ourselves.
We are subject to the risk of additional litigation and regulatory proceedings or actions in connection with the restatement. We have responded to inquiries and provided information and documents related to the restatement to the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice, the New York Stock Exchange, and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. We were the subject of a Wells Notice from the SEC stating that the Staff intends to recommend that the SEC bring a civil injunctive action against us, alleging violations of the federal securities laws arising from the restatement. See additional discussion under Part I Item 3 Legal Proceedings of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Although we recently settled this matter with the SEC, additional regulatory inquiries may also be commenced by other U.S. federal, state or foreign regulatory agencies. In addition, we may in the future be subject to additional litigation or other proceedings or actions arising in relation to the restatement of our historical interim financial statements. Litigation and any potential regulatory proceeding or action may be time consuming, expensive and distracting from the conduct of our business. The adverse resolution of any specific lawsuit or any potential regulatory proceeding or action could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
These litigation proceedings could result in substantial additional costs and expenses and adversely affect our cash flows, and may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. For example, we have incurred substantial expenses for legal, accounting, tax and other professional services in connection with the investigation by the audit committee of our board of directors, our internal review of our historical financial statements, the preparation of the restated financial statements, inquiries from government
agencies, the related litigation, and the amendments to our credit agreement as a result of our failure to timely file our Exchange Act reports with the SEC. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses in connection with these matters. Many members of our senior management team and our Board of Directors have been and will be required to devote a significant amount of time to the litigation related to the restatement. In addition, certain of these individuals are named defendants in the litigation related to the restatement. Defending these actions may require significant time and attention from them. If our senior management is unable to devote sufficient time in the future developing and pursuing our strategic business initiatives and running ongoing business operations, there may be a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may be subject to additional impairment charges due to potential declines in the fair value of our assets.
As a result of our acquisitions, particularly that of Lipman in November 2006, we have significant goodwill and intangible assets on our balance sheet. We test goodwill and intangible assets for impairment on a periodic basis as required, and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. The events or changes that could require us to test our goodwill and intangible assets for impairment include a reduction in our stock price and market capitalization and changes in our estimated future cash flows, as well as changes in rates of growth in our industry or in any of our reporting units. In the fourth quarter of 2008, we recorded an impairment charge of $289.1 million for goodwill and developed technology intangible assets due to lower revenue expectations in light of current operating performance and future operating expectations. During the first fiscal quarter of 2009, we concluded that the carrying amount of the North America and Asia reporting units exceeded their implied fair values and recorded an estimated impairment charge of $178.2 million. We finalized the goodwill evaluation process and recorded a $2.7 million reduction of impairment charge during the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The final goodwill impairment charge was $175.5 million as of April 30, 2009. We have not recorded any further impairment charges since the quarter ended April 30, 2009.
We will continue to evaluate the carrying value of our remaining goodwill and intangible assets and if we determine in the future that there is a potential further impairment in any of our reporting units, we may be required to record additional charges to earnings which could materially adversely affect our financial results and could also materially adversely affect our business. The process of evaluating the potential impairment of goodwill and intangible assets is subjective and requires significant judgment at many points during the analysis and includes estimates of our future cash flows attributable to a reporting unit or asset over its estimated remaining useful life. Any changes in our estimates, such as our estimates of the future cash flows attributable to a reporting unit or asset, or a longer or more significant decline in our market capitalization or the macroeconomic environment, could require us to record additional impairment charges which could materially adversely affect our financial results. See Part II Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Note 2. Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets under Part II Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for additional information related to impairment of goodwill and intangible assets.
Our North American and International operations are not equally profitable, which may promote volatility in our earnings and may adversely impact future growth in our earnings.
Our International sales of System Solutions have tended to carry lower average selling prices and therefore have lower gross margins than our sales in North America. As a result, if we successfully expand our International sales, any improvement in our results of operations will likely not be as favorable as an expansion of similar magnitude in the United States and Canada. In addition, we are unable to predict for any future period our proportion of revenues that will result from International sales versus sales in North America. Variations in this proportion from period to period may lead to volatility in our results of operations which, in turn, may depress the trading price of our common stock.
Security is vital to our customers and end users and therefore breaches in the security of our solutions could adversely affect our reputation and results of operations.
Protection against fraud is of key importance to the purchasers and end users of our solutions. We incorporate security features, such as encryption software and secure hardware, into our solutions to protect against fraud in electronic payment transactions and to ensure the privacy and integrity of consumer data. Our solutions may be vulnerable to breaches in security due to defects in the security mechanisms, the operating system and applications, or the hardware platform. Security vulnerabilities could jeopardize the security of information transmitted or stored using our solutions. We also provide our customers with repair, encryption key loading and helpdesk services, and have in the past and may in the future also experience security breaches or fraudulent activities related to unauthorized access to sensitive customer information. If the security of our solutions is compromised, our reputation and marketplace acceptance of our solutions will be adversely affected, which would cause our business to suffer, and we may become subject to damages claims.
Our solutions may have defects that could result in sales delays, delays in our collection of receivables, increased costs and claims against us.
We offer complex solutions that are susceptible to undetected hardware and software errors or failures. Solutions may experience failures when first introduced, as new versions are released, or at any time during their lifecycle. Defects may also arise from third party components that we incorporate into our products, such as hardware modules, chipsets or battery cells. Any product recalls as a result of errors or failures could result in the loss of or delays in market acceptance of our solutions, adversely affect our business and reputation and increase our product costs which could negatively impact our margins, profitability and results of operations. In July 2009, we recorded a $3.2 million warranty accrual related to a potential warranty exposure for one of our products. During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, we recorded an additional warranty accrual of $2.4 million related to this potential exposure. The amount accrued represents our current best estimate of our exposure based on relevant facts and circumstances. There is a reasonable possibility that we may incur additional warranty expense related to this product in future periods. Any significant returns or warranty claims for this product or any of our products could result in significant additional costs to us and could adversely affect our results of operations. Our customers may also run third-party software applications on our electronic payment systems. Errors in third-party applications could adversely affect the performance of our solutions.
The existence of defects and delays in correcting them could result in negative consequences, including the following: harm to our brand; delays in shipping system solutions; loss of market acceptance for our system solutions; additional warranty expenses; diversion of resources from product development; and loss of credibility with distributors and customers. Correcting defects can be time consuming and in some circumstances extremely difficult. Software errors may take several months to correct, and hardware defects may take even longer to correct.
We may accumulate excess or obsolete inventory that could result in unanticipated price reductions and write-downs and adversely affect our financial condition.
In formulating our solutions, we have focused our efforts on providing to our customers solutions with higher levels of functionality, which requires us to develop and incorporate cutting edge and evolving technologies. This approach tends to increase the risk of obsolescence for products and components we hold in inventory and may compound the difficulties posed by other factors that affect our inventory levels, including the following:
The accumulation of excess or obsolete inventory has in the past resulted in and may in future periods result in price reductions and inventory write-downs and scrap, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. We incurred costs for obsolete inventory, scrap, and purchase commitments for excess components at contract manufacturers of $23.0 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 and $11.8 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, with the significant increase year over year due to changing demand we experienced in fiscal year 2009 as a result of the severe deterioration in the macroeconomic environment. See also Part II, Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
If we do not accurately forecast customer demand and effectively manage our product mix and inventory levels, we may lose sales from having too few or the wrong mix of products or incur costs associated with excess inventory.
If we improperly forecast demand for our products we could end up with too many products and be unable to sell the excess inventory in a timely manner, if at all, or, alternatively we could end up with too few products and not be able to satisfy demand. This problem is exacerbated because we attempt to closely match inventory levels with product demand leaving limited margin for error, and we generally receive a significant volume of customer orders towards the end of each fiscal quarter which leave us little room to adjust inventory mix to match demand. Also, during the transition from an existing product to a new replacement product, we must accurately predict the demand for the existing and the new product. Our inability to properly manage our inventory levels could cause us to incur increased expenses associated with writing off excessive or obsolete inventory or lose sales or have to ship products by air freight to meet immediate demand incurring incremental freight costs above sea freight costs, a preferred method, and suffering a corresponding decline in gross margins. If we do not accurately predict demand, we could also incur increased expenses associated with binding commitments to certain third party contract manufacturers which would negatively impact our gross margins and operating results. See Note 12. Commitment and Contingencies under Part II Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. During times of economic uncertainty, such as that of the current global economic environment, it becomes more difficult to accurately forecast demand and manage our inventory levels. Deteriorating market conditions have in the past and can in future periods cause us to incur additional costs associated with excess and obsolete inventory, scrap and excess inventory held by our contract manufacturers. For example, we incurred approximately $23.0 million of such costs for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009.
Our proprietary technology is difficult to protect and unauthorized use of our proprietary technology by third parties may impair our ability to compete effectively.
We may not be able to protect our proprietary technology, which could enable competitors to develop services that compete with our own. We rely on copyright, trademark, and trade secret laws, as well as confidentiality, licensing and other contractual arrangements to establish and protect the proprietary aspects of our solutions. Institution of legal proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights could be costly and divert the efforts and attention of our management and technical personnel from other business operations. In addition, there can be no assurance that such proceedings would be determined in our favor. We do not have patent protection for certain important aspects of our current solutions. The laws of some countries in which we sell our solutions and services may not protect software and intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws in the United States. If we are unable to prevent misappropriation of our technology, competitors may be able to use and adapt our technology. Our failure to protect our technology could diminish our competitive advantage and cause us to lose customers to competitors.
Our business may suffer if we are sued for infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties, or if we are unable to obtain rights to third-party intellectual property on which we depend.
Third parties have in the past asserted and may in the future assert claims that our system solutions infringe their proprietary rights. Such infringement claims, even if meritless, may cause us to incur significant costs in defending those claims. We may be required to discontinue using and selling any infringing technology and
services, to expend resources to develop non-infringing technology or to purchase licenses or pay royalties for other technology. Similarly, we depend on our ability to license intellectual property from third parties. These or other third parties may become unwilling to license to us on acceptable terms intellectual property that is necessary to our business. In either case, we may be unable to acquire licenses for other technology on reasonable commercial terms or at all. As a result, we may find that we are unable to continue to offer the solutions and services upon which our business depends.
We have received, and have currently pending, third-party claims and may receive additional notices of such claims of infringement in the future. Infringement claims may cause us to incur significant costs in defending those claims or to settle claims to avoid costly or protracted litigation even if we deem those claims to be without merit. For example, in September 2007, SPA Syspatronic AG commenced an infringement action against us and others and in March 2008, Cardsoft, Inc. and Cardsoft (Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors), LLC commenced an infringement action against us and others. Infringement claims are expensive and time consuming to defend, regardless of the merits or ultimate outcome. Similar claims may result in additional protracted and costly litigation. There can be no assurance that we will continue to prevail in any such actions or that any license required under any such patent or other intellectual property would be made available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. See Note 12. Commitments and Contingencies under Part II Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
We face litigation and tax assessment risks that could force us to incur substantial defense costs and could result in damages awards against us that would negatively impact our business.
As described in Note 12. Commitments and Contingencies under Part II Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, there are a number of pending litigation and tax assessment matters each of which may be time-consuming to resolve, expensive to defend, and disruptive to normal business operations. The outcome of litigation and tax assessments is inherently difficult to predict. An unfavorable resolution of any specific lawsuit or tax assessment could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We may not be able to attract, integrate, manage, and retain qualified personnel.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our key senior management, engineering, sales and marketing, and manufacturing personnel, many of whom would be difficult to replace. In addition, our future success also depends on our ability to attract, integrate, manage, and retain highly skilled employees throughout our businesses. Competition for some of these personnel is intense, and in the past, we have had difficulty hiring employees in our desired time frame, particularly qualified finance and accounting professionals. We may be unsuccessful in attracting and retaining personnel. The loss of the services of any of our key personnel, the inability to attract or retain qualified personnel in the future, or delays in hiring required personnel, particularly engineers and sales personnel, could make it difficult for us to manage our business and meet key objectives, such as timely product introductions.
During the last two fiscal years, we implemented work force reduction plans reducing the number of employees and contractors. These reductions have also required that we reassign certain employee duties. Workforce reductions and job reassignments could negatively affect employee morale, and make it difficult to motivate and retain our remaining employees and contractors, which would affect our ability to deliver our products in a timely fashion and otherwise negatively affect our business.
In addition, the restatement of our historical interim financial statements has adversely impacted our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel and may also have affected the morale and productivity of our workforce, including as a result of the uncertainties inherent in the restatement process, as well as our inability to provide equity-based compensation or permit the exercise of outstanding stock options from the time we announced that we would be restating our interim financial statements to August 2008, when we filed the required reports with
the SEC. Moreover, the restatement process has adversely affected the market for our shares making our equity compensation program potentially less attractive for current or prospective employees.
Shipments of electronic payment systems may be delayed by factors outside of our control, which can harm our reputation and our relationships with our customers.
The shipment of payment systems requires us or our manufacturers, distributors, or other agents to obtain customs or other government certifications and approvals, and, on occasion, to submit to physical inspection of our systems in transit. Failure to satisfy these requirements, and the very process of trying to satisfy them, can lead to lengthy delays in the delivery of our solutions to our direct or indirect customers. Delays and unreliable delivery by us may harm our reputation in the industry and our relationships with our customers.
Force majeure events, such as terrorist attacks, other acts of violence or war, political instability, and health epidemics may adversely affect us.
Terrorist attacks, war and international political instability, along with health epidemics may disrupt our ability to generate revenues. Such events may negatively affect our ability to maintain sales revenues and to develop new business relationships. Because a substantial and growing part of our revenues is derived from sales and services to customers outside of the United States and we have our electronic payment systems manufactured outside the U.S., terrorist attacks, war and international political instability anywhere may decrease international demand for our products and inhibit customer development opportunities abroad, disrupt our supply chain and impair our ability to deliver our electronic payment systems, which could materially adversely affect our net revenues or results of operations. Any of these events may also disrupt global financial markets and precipitate a decline in the price of our common stock.
Natural or manmade disasters, business interruptions and health epidemics could delay our ability to receive or ship our products, or otherwise disrupt our business.
Our worldwide operations could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, tsunamis, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, health epidemics and other natural or manmade disasters or business interruptions. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Our corporate headquarters, and a portion of our research and development activities, are located in California, and other critical business operations and some of our suppliers are located in California and Asia, near major earthquake faults. If our manufacturers or warehousing facilities are disrupted or destroyed, we would be unable to distribute our products on a timely basis, which could harm our business. Moreover, if our computer information systems or communication systems, or those of our vendors or customers, are subject to hacker attacks or other disruptions, our business could suffer. We have not established a comprehensive disaster recovery plan. Our back-up operations may be inadequate and our business interruption insurance may not be enough to compensate us for any losses that may occur. A significant business interruption could result in losses or damages and harm our business. For example, much of our order fulfillment process is automated and the order information is stored on our servers. If our computer systems and servers go down even for a short period at the end of a fiscal quarter, our ability to recognize revenue would be delayed until we were again able to process and ship our orders, which could harm our revenues for that quarter and cause our stock price to decline significantly.
While we believe we comply with environmental laws and regulations, we are still exposed to potential risks associated with environmental laws and regulations.
We are subject to other legal and regulatory requirements, including a European Union directive that places restrictions on the use of hazardous substances (RoHS) in electronic equipment, a European Union directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), and the environmental regulations promulgated by Chinas Ministry of Information Industry (China RoHS). RoHS sets a framework for producers obligations in relation to
manufacturing (including the amounts of named hazardous substances contained in products sold) and WEEE sets a framework for treatment, labeling, recovery, and recycling of electronic products in the European Union which may require us to alter the manufacturing of the physical devices that include our solutions and/or require active steps to promote recycling of materials and components. In addition, similar legislation could be enacted in other jurisdictions, including in the United States. If we do not comply with the RoHS directives, WEEE directives and China RoHS, we may suffer a loss of revenue, be unable to sell in certain markets or countries, be subject to penalties and enforced fees, and/or suffer a competitive disadvantage. Furthermore, the costs to comply with RoHS, WEEE and China RoHS, or with current and future environmental and worker health and safety laws may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We may pursue complementary acquisitions and strategic investments, which will involve numerous risks. We may not be able to address these risks without substantial expense, delay or other operational or financial problems.
We may seek to acquire or make investments in related businesses, technologies, or products in the future. Acquisitions or investments involve various risks, such as:
Future acquisitions and investments could also result in substantial cash expenditures, potentially dilutive issuance of our equity securities and incurrence of additional debt, contingent liabilities and amortization expenses related to other intangible assets that could adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. We depend on the retention and performance of existing management and employees of acquired businesses for the day-to-day management and future operating results of these businesses.
Risks Related to Our Industry
Our markets are highly competitive and subject to price erosion.
The markets for our system solutions and services are highly competitive, and we have been subject to price pressures. Competition from manufacturers, distributors, or providers of products similar to or competitive with our system solutions or services could result in price reductions, reduced margins, and a loss of market share or could render our solutions obsolete. For example, First Data Corporation, a leading provider of payments processing services, and formerly our largest customer, has developed and continues to develop a series of proprietary electronic payment systems for the U.S. market.
We expect to continue to experience significant and increasing levels of competition in the future. We compete with suppliers of cash registers that provide built-in electronic payment capabilities and producers of software that facilitates electronic payment over the internet, as well as other manufacturers or distributors of electronic payment systems. We must also compete with smaller companies that have been able to develop
strong local or regional customer bases. In certain foreign countries, some competitors are more established, benefit from greater name recognition and have greater resources within those countries than we do. Further, in certain international markets, such as Brazil, we may face competition from refurbished units which could result in reduced demand and pricing pressures.
We must adhere to industry and government regulations and standards and therefore sales will suffer if we cannot comply with them.
Our system solutions must meet industry standards imposed by EMVCo LLC, a payment systems standards setting organization, Visa, MasterCard, and other credit card associations and standard setting organizations. New standards are continually being adopted or proposed as a result of worldwide anti-fraud initiatives, the increasing need for system compatibility and technology developments such as wireless and wireline IP communication. Our solutions also must comply with government regulations, including those imposed by telecommunications authorities and independent standards groups worldwide regarding emissions, radiation, and connections with telecommunications and radio networks. We cannot be sure that we will be able to design our solutions to comply with future standards or regulations on a timely basis, if at all. Compliance with these standards could increase the cost of developing or producing our solutions. New products designed to meet any new standards need to be introduced to the market and ordinarily need to be certified by the credit card associations and our customers before being purchased. The certification process is costly and time consuming and increases the amount of time it takes to sell our products. Our business and financial condition could be adversely affected if we cannot comply with new or existing industry standards, or obtain or retain necessary regulatory approval or certifications in a timely fashion, or if compliance results in increasing the cost of our products. Selling products that are non-compliant may result in fines against us or our customers, which we may be liable to pay. In addition, even if our products are designed to be compliant, compliance with certain security standards is determined based on the merchants or service providers network environment in which our systems are installed and, therefore, is dependent upon a number of additional factors such as proper installation of the components of the environment including our systems, compliance of software and system components provided by other vendors, implementation of compliant security processes and business practices and adherence to such processes and practices. Our business and financial condition could be adversely affected if we do not comply with new or existing industry standards, or obtain or retain necessary regulatory approval or certifications in a timely fashion, or if compliance results in increasing the cost of our products.
If we do not continually enhance our existing solutions and develop and market new solutions and enhancements, our net revenues and income will be adversely affected.
The market for electronic payment systems is characterized by:
Because of these factors, we must continually enhance our existing solutions and develop and market new solutions. These efforts require significant investment in research and development as well as increased costs of manufacturing and distributing our system solutions, and we may not necessarily be able to increase or maintain prices to account for these costs.
We cannot be sure that we will successfully complete the development and introduction of new solutions or enhancements or that our new solutions will be accepted in the marketplace. We may also fail to develop and deploy new solutions and enhancements on a timely basis. In either case, we may lose market share to our competitors, and our net revenues and results of operations could suffer.
Risks Related to Our Capital Structure
Our secured credit facility contains restrictive and financial covenants and, if we are unable to comply with these covenants, we will be in default. A default could result in the acceleration of our outstanding indebtedness, which would have an adverse effect on our business and stock price.
On October 31, 2006, our principal subsidiary, VeriFone, Inc., entered into a secured credit agreement consisting of a Term B Loan facility of $500.0 million and a revolving credit facility permitting borrowings of up to $40.0 million (the Credit Facility). The proceeds from the Term B loan were used to repay all outstanding amounts relating to an existing senior secured credit agreement, pay certain transaction costs, and partially fund the cash consideration in connection with the acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006. Through October 31, 2009, we had repaid an aggregate of $273.7 million, leaving a Term B Loan balance of $226.3 million at October 31, 2009.
Our Credit Facility contains customary covenants that require our subsidiaries to maintain certain specified financial ratios and restrict their ability to make certain distributions with respect to their capital stock, prepay other debt, encumber their assets, incur additional indebtedness, make capital expenditures above specified levels, engage in certain business combinations, or undertake various other corporate activities. Therefore, as a practical matter, these covenants restrict our ability to engage in or benefit from such activities. In addition, we have, in order to secure repayment of our Credit Facility, pledged substantially all of our assets and properties. This pledge may reduce our operating flexibility because it restricts our ability to dispose of these assets or engage in other transactions that may be beneficial to us.
If we are unable to comply with the covenants in our Credit Facility, we will be in default, which could result in the acceleration of our outstanding indebtedness. In addition, if our leverage exceeds a certain level set out in our Credit Facility, a portion of our excess cash flows must be used to pay down our outstanding debt. If acceleration occurs, we may not be able to repay our debt and we may not be able to borrow sufficient additional funds to refinance our debt. The U.S. credit markets have contracted significantly and as a result we may not be able to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms, or at all. If we were to default in performance under the Credit Facility we may pursue an amendment or waiver of the Credit Facility with our existing lenders, but there can be no assurance that the lenders would grant such an amendment or waiver and, in light of current credit market conditions, any such amendment or waiver requested is likely to be on terms, including additional fees, as well as increased interest rates and other more stringent terms and conditions that would be materially disadvantageous to us. For example, as a result of the delay in our financial reports for the 2007 fiscal year and the first two fiscal quarters of 2008, we were required to obtain amendments to our Credit Facility that resulted in an increase in the interest rate payable on our term loan and revolving commitments, as well as increases in the commitment fee for unused revolving commitments and letter of credit fees. We also paid the consenting lenders amendment fees in connection with the amendments. We expect that in light of current market conditions any lenders fees or other terms and conditions for a covenant waiver or amendment would be substantially more costly to us today than the cost we incurred for credit agreement amendments in 2008.
The conditions of the U.S. and international capital markets may adversely affect our ability to draw on our revolving credit facility as well as have an adverse effect on other financial transactions.
Lehman Commercial Paper, Inc. (Lehman CP) was a lender under our revolving credit facility with a commitment of $15 million out of the $40 million facility. As a result of Lehman CPs filing of a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in October 2008, we reduced the revolving credit facility by its commitment.
In addition, the filing by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (Lehman Brothers) of a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition constituted an event of default under our convertible note hedge transaction with Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives Inc. (Lehman Derivatives), giving us the immediate right to terminate the transaction and entitling us to claim reimbursement for the loss incurred in terminating and closing out the transaction. On September 21, 2008, we delivered a notice of termination to Lehman Derivatives and claimed
reimbursement for the loss incurred in termination and close out of the transaction. There can be no assurance we will receive any reimbursement of the losses incurred and we could incur significant costs to replace this hedge transaction if we elect to do so. These replacement costs may not be fully offset by any proceeds recoverable from Lehman Brothers and Lehman Derivatives (which has also filed a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition) following our termination of the convertible note hedge transaction with Lehman Derivatives.
If other financial institutions that have extended credit commitments to us or have entered into hedge, insurance or similar transactions with us are adversely affected by the conditions of the U.S. and international capital markets, they may become unable to fund borrowings under their credit commitments to us or otherwise fulfill their obligations under the relevant transactions, which could have a material and adverse impact on our financial condition and our ability to borrow additional funds, if needed, for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other corporate purposes.
Our indebtedness and debt service obligations under our Credit Facility may adversely affect our cash flow, cash position, and stock price.
We intend to fulfill our debt service obligations under our Credit Facility from existing cash, investments and operations. Principal payments on the Term B Loan are due in equal quarterly instalments over the term with a maturity date of October 31, 2013. In the future, if we are unable to generate or raise additional cash sufficient to meet these obligations and need to use more of our existing cash than planned or to liquidate investments in order to fund these obligations, we may have to delay or curtail the development and/or the sales and marketing of new payment systems.
Our indebtedness could have significant additional negative consequences, including, without limitation:
Additionally, if we are required to refinance or raise additional cash to settle our existing indebtedness on or prior to its maturity, our ability to successfully achieve such objective is dependent on a number of factors, including but not limited to our business outlook, projected financial performance, general availability of corporate credit, and market demand for our securities offerings.
Some provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may delay or prevent transactions that many stockholders may favor.
Some provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of delaying, discouraging or preventing a merger or acquisition that our stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which stockholders might receive a premium for their shares. These provisions include:
Our share price has been volatile and we expect that the price of our common stock may continue to fluctuate substantially.
Our stock price has fluctuated substantially since our initial public offering in 2005 and more recently since the announcement of our anticipated restatement in December 2007 and during the recent turmoil in the worldwide financial markets. In addition to fluctuations related to Company-specific factors, broad market and industry factors may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. Factors that could cause fluctuations in our stock price may include, among other things:
Our headquarters are located in San Jose, California. Warehouse and distribution facilities are located in the U.S., Israel, the United Kingdom, Turkey, Argentina, Spain and Brazil. Our warehouse and distribution space is leased and totals approximately 262,000 square feet.
We also maintain research facilities and sales and administrative offices in the U.S. at approximately 12 locations in seven states or jurisdictions and outside the U.S. at approximately 56 locations in 21 countries. All of these locations are leased. We are using substantially all of our currently available productive space to develop, manufacture, market, sell and distribute our products. Our facilities are in good operating condition, suitable for their respective uses and adequate for current needs.
Brazilian State Tax Assessments
State Value Added Tax
One of our Brazilian subsidiaries has been notified of a tax assessment regarding Brazilian state value added tax (VAT), for the periods from 2000 to 2002 that relates to products supplied to us by a contract manufacturer. The assessment relates to an asserted deficiency of 4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately $2.7 million). The tax assessment was based on a clerical error in which our Brazilian subsidiary omitted the required tax exemption number on its invoices. On August 27, 2003, the tax authorities rendered a first level decision that maintained the tax assessment. We have appealed the first level decision. On March 30, 2009, the proceeding was remitted to the State Court of Appeals. This proceeding is currently pending second administrative level decision. We do not expect that we will ultimately incur a material liability in respect of this assessment and have not recorded a reserve for this assessment, because we believe, based in part on advice of our Brazilian tax counsel, that we are likely to prevail in the proceedings relating to this assessment. In the event we receive an adverse ruling from the administrative body, we will decide whether or not to appeal and would reexamine the determination as to whether an accrual is necessary. It is currently uncertain what impact this state tax examination may have with respect to our use of a corresponding exemption to reduce the Brazilian federal VAT.
Importation of Goods Assessments
Two of our Brazilian subsidiaries that were acquired as a part of the Lipman acquisition have been notified of assessments regarding Brazilian customs penalties that relate to alleged infractions in the importation of goods. The assessments were issued by the Federal Revenue Department in the City of Vitória, the City of São Paulo, and the City of Itajai. The assessments relate to asserted deficiencies initially totaling 26.9 million Brazilian reais (approximately $15.3 million) excluding interest. The tax authorities allege that the structure used for the importation of goods was simulated with the objective of evading taxes levied on the importation by under-invoicing the imported goods. The tax authorities allege that the simulation was created through a fraudulent interposition of parties, where the real sellers and buyers of the imported goods were hidden.
In the Vitória tax assessment, the fines were reduced from 4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately $2.7 million) to 1.5 million Brazilian reais (approximately $0.8 million) on a first level administrative decision on January 26, 2007. The proceeding has been remitted to the Taxpayers Council to adjudicate the appeal of the first level administrative decision filed by the tax authorities. We also appealed the first level administrative decision on February 26, 2007. In this appeal, we argued that the tax authorities did not have enough evidence to determine that the import transactions were indeed fraudulent and that, even if there were some irregularities in such importations, they could not be deemed to be our responsibility since all the transactions were performed by the third-party importer of the goods. On February 27, 2008, the Taxpayers Council rendered its decision to investigate the first level administrative decision for further analysis of the matter. This proceeding was initially scheduled for judgment before the decision of the Taxpayers Administrative Council of Tax Appeals in 2009, but has been postponed to the next judgment session. In the event we receive an adverse ruling from the Taxpayers Council, we will decide whether or not to appeal to the judicial level. Based on our current understanding of the underlying facts, we believe that it is probable that our Brazilian subsidiary will be required to pay some amount of fines. At October 31, 2009, we have accrued 4.7 million Brazilian reais (approximately $2.7 million) for this matter, excluding interest, which we believe is the probable payment.
On July 12, 2007, we were notified of a first administrative level decision rendered in the São Paulo tax assessment, which maintained the total fine of 20.2 million Brazilian reais (approximately $11.5 million), imposed. On August 10, 2007, we appealed the first administrative level decision to the Taxpayers Council. A hearing was held on August 12, 2008 before the Taxpayers Council, and on October 14, 2008, the Taxpayers Council granted our appeal and dismissed the São Paulo assessment based upon the assessment being erroneously calculated on the value of the sale of the products in question to end customers in the local market rather than on the declared importation value of such products. We were subsequently notified of the Taxpayers
Councils decision and the case was dismissed on May 19, 2009. In August 2009, the Brazilian tax authorities requested additional materials from us. In October 2009, we received a revised assessment in this matter of 1.9 million Brazilian reais (approximately $1.1 million). In addition, pursuant to a contingency legal representation agreement entered into between our Brazilian subsidiary (prior to the Lipman acquisition) and Brazilian counsel, our Brazilian subsidiary has agreed to pay to Brazilian counsel legal fees in the amount of 5.0 million Brazilian reais (approximately $2.8 million) for achieving the successful dismissal of the São Paulo tax assessment. We paid approximately 2.0 million Brazilian reais (approximately $1.1 million) of this legal fee during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009 and will pay the remainder over the next 12 months. At October 31, 2009, we have reduced the accrual for this matter to 4.6 million Brazilian reais (approximately $2.6 million), including the remaining Brazilian counsel legal fees.
On May 22, 2008, we were notified of a first administrative level decision rendered in the Itajai assessment, which maintained the total fine of 2.0 million Brazilian reais (approximately $1.1 million), imposed, excluding interest. On May 27, 2008, we appealed the first level administrative level decision to the Taxpayers Council. Based on our current understanding of the underlying facts, we believe that it is probable that our Brazilian subsidiary will be required to pay some amount of fines. Accordingly, at October 31, 2009, we have accrued 2.0 million Brazilian reais (approximately $1.1 million) for this matter, excluding interest.
Patent Infringement and Commercial Litigation
Heartland Payment Systems, Inc.
On September 6, 2009, we commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Heartland Payment Systems, Inc. (Heartland), a card payment processor, for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,853,093 by certain Heartland payment terminals. We are seeking a judgment of infringement, an injunction against further infringement, damages, interest and attorneys fees. On September 16, 2009, Heartland sued us in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Mercer County, alleging certain unfair business activities. On October 13, 2009, we amended our original complaint to request declaratory judgment that we did not engage in such unfair business activities. On November 6, 2009, we filed a second lawsuit against Heartland in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging certain false advertising and unfair competition claims. On that same day, Heartland also filed a second lawsuit against us in the United States District Court, District of New Jersey, alleging trademark infringement, false advertising and violation of the Anti-cybersquatting Protection Act, and an emergency application for a temporary restraining order which was subsequently denied by the New Jersey District Court. A preliminary injunction hearing in the matter is scheduled in December 2009 before the New Jersey District Court. These actions are in the preliminary stages and at this time we are not able to predict the outcome or quantify any potential liability, if any, for these actions. An unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow.
SPA Syspatronic AG v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc., et al.
On September 18, 2007, SPA Syspatronic AG (SPA) commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against us and others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,093,862 purportedly owned by SPA. SPA is seeking a judgment of infringement, an injunction against further infringement, damages, interest and attorneys fees. We filed an answer and counterclaims on November 8, 2007, and intend to vigorously defend this litigation. On January 28, 2008, we requested that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the PTO) perform a re-examination of the patent. The PTO granted the request on April 4, 2008. We then filed a motion to stay the proceedings with the court and on April 25, 2008, the court agreed to stay the proceedings pending the re-examination. On December 19, 2008, the PTO rejected all claims of the subject patent on the same basis as was identified in our request for re-examination. The case is still in the preliminary stages, and it is not possible to quantify the extent of our potential liability, if any, related to this action. An unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow.
Cardsoft, Inc. et al v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc., et al.
On March 6, 2008, Cardsoft, Inc. and Cardsoft (Assignment for the Benefit of Creditors), LLC (Cardsoft) commenced an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, against us and others, alleging infringement of U.S. Patents No. 6,934,945 and No. 7,302,683 purportedly owned by Cardsoft. Cardsoft is seeking a judgment of infringement, an injunction against further infringement, damages, interest and attorneys fees. We intend to vigorously defend this litigation. The case is still in the preliminary stages, and it is not possible to quantify the extent of our potential liability, if any, related to this action. An unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flow.
Communication Transaction Solutions, Inc. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., VeriFone, Inc., et al.
We were a defendant in an action initiated in the California Superior Court in Santa Clara County on August 30, 2006, in which the plaintiff alleged among other things misappropriation of trade secrets in connection with our development of our wireless pay-at-the-table system. These allegations followed our decision in October 2005 to terminate discussions regarding a possible acquisition of the plaintiffs business. The plaintiff sought damages, interest and attorneys fees. The parties argued summary judgment motions on September 4, 2008 and on September 11, 2008, the court dismissed certain of the plaintiffs claims. In January 2009, without admitting any misappropriation of trade secrets, wrongdoing or violation of law and to avoid the distraction and expense of continued litigation, we settled the litigation with the plaintiff. In exchange for a payment of $3.0 million by us, all asserted claims were dismissed and we received a perpetual, fully paid-up license to all plaintiff intellectual property and trade secrets asserted in the lawsuit.
Class Action and Derivative Lawsuits
On or after December 4, 2007, several securities class action claims were filed against us and certain of our officers, former officers, and a former director. These lawsuits were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation, C 07-6140 MHP. The original actions were: Eichenholtz v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6140 MHP; Lien v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6195 JSW; Vaughn et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6197 VRW (Plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this complaint on March 7, 2008); Feldman et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6218 MMC; Cerini v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6228 SC; Westend Capital Management LLC v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6237 MMC; Hill v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6238 MHP; Offutt v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc. et al., C 07-6241 JSW; Feitel v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al., C 08-0118 CW. On August 22, 2008, the court appointed plaintiff National Elevator Fund lead plaintiff and its attorneys lead counsel. Plaintiff filed its consolidated amended class action complaint on October 31, 2008, which asserts claims under the Securities Exchange Act Sections 10(b), 20(a), and 20A and Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 for securities fraud and control person liability against us and certain of our current and former officers and directors, based on allegations that we and the individual defendants made false or misleading public statements regarding our business and operations during the putative class periods and seeks unspecified monetary damages and other relief. We filed our motion to dismiss on December 31, 2008. The court granted our motion on May 26, 2009 and dismissed the consolidated amended class action complaint with leave to amend within 30 days of the ruling. The proceedings were stayed pending a mediation held in October 2009 at which time the parties failed to reach a mutually agreeable settlement. Plaintiffs second amended complaint was filed on December 3, 2009 and our responsive motion is due on January 25, 2010. Although discovery has not yet commenced in this action, on November 20, 2009, plaintiffs filed a motion to partially lift the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act discovery stay in order to obtain documents produced by us to the SEC in connection with the SECs investigation into the restatement of our fiscal year 2007 interim financial statements. Our opposition to this motion is due January 11, 2010, with a hearing on the motion scheduled for February 1, 2010. At this time, we have not recorded any liabilities related to this action as we are unable to estimate any potential liability.
Beginning on December 13, 2007, several actions were also filed against certain current and former directors and officers derivatively on our behalf. These derivative lawsuits were filed in: (1) the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. C 07-6347 MHP, which consolidates King v. Bergeron, et al. (Case No. 07-CV-6347), Hilborn v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al. (Case No. 08-CV-1132), Patel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case No. 08-CV-1133), and Lemmond, et al. v. VeriFone Holdings, Inc., et al. (Case No. 08-CV-1301); and (2) California Superior Court, Santa Clara County, as In re VeriFone Holdings, Inc. Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. 1-07-CV-100980, which consolidates Catholic Medical Mission Board v. Bergeron, et al. (Case No. 1-07-CV-100980), and Carpel v. Bergeron, et al. (Case No. 1-07-CV-101449). On May 15, 2008, the court in the federal derivative action appointed Charles R. King as lead plaintiff and his attorneys as lead counsel. On October 31, 2008, plaintiffs in the federal action filed their consolidated amended derivative complaint, which names us as a nominal defendant and brings claims for insider selling, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against us and certain of our current and former officers and directors. On December 15, 2008, we and the other defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The parties agreed by stipulation that briefing on this motion would relate only to the issue of plaintiffs failure to make a pre-suit demand on our Board of Directors. The court granted our motion on May 26, 2009 and dismissed the consolidated amended derivative complaint with leave to amend within 30 days of the ruling. The proceedings were stayed pending a mediation held in October 2009 at which time the parties failed to reach a mutually agreeable settlement. Plaintiffs second amended complaint was filed on December 10, 2009 and our responsive motion is due on January 25, 2010. While discovery is not yet underway in this action, on June 9, 2009, plaintiffs in the federal derivative action made a demand to inspect certain of our books and records. In response to this demand, we provided certain of our books and records, including minutes and materials for our Board of Directors, Audit Committee and Compensation Committee meetings for the relevant period. We produced documents responsive to each category of plaintiffs request except that we withheld production, on the basis of privilege, of the Audit Committees report of the independent investigation into the events leading to the restatement of our fiscal year 2007 interim financial statements. On November 6, 2009, plaintiffs filed a complaint in Delaware Chancery Court seeking to compel production of the independent investigation report. We filed a motion to dismiss this complaint on December 3, 2009, and our opening brief in support of the motion to dismiss is due in January 2010. At this time, we have not recorded any liabilities for this action as we are unable to estimate any potential liability.
On October 31, 2008, the derivative plaintiffs filed their consolidated derivative complaint in California Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara naming us as a nominal defendant and bringing claims for insider selling, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty against certain of our current and former officers and directors and our largest shareholder as of October 31, 2008, GTCR Golder Rauner. On November 10, 2008, we filed a motion to stay the state court action pending resolution of the parallel federal actions, and the parties have agreed by stipulation to delay briefing on the motion to stay until after the issue of demand futility is resolved in the federal derivative case. The case management conference in the state court action has been continued until April 2010, pending the resolution of our motion to dismiss filed in the federal derivative action. At this time, we have not recorded any liabilities for this action as we are unable to estimate any potential liability.
On January 27, 2008, a class action complaint was filed against us in the Central District Court in Tel Aviv, Israel on behalf of purchasers of our stock on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange. The complaint seeks compensation for damages allegedly incurred by the class of plaintiffs due to the publication of erroneous financial reports. We filed a motion to stay the action, in light of the proceedings already filed in the United States, on March 31, 2008. A hearing on the motion was held on May 25, 2008. Further briefing in support of the stay motion, specifically with regard to the threshold issue of applicable law, was submitted on June 24, 2008. On September 11, 2008, the Israeli District Court ruled in our favor, holding that U.S. law would apply in determining our liability. On October 7, 2008, plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to appeal the District Courts ruling to the Israeli Supreme Court. Our response to plaintiffs appeal motion was filed on January 18, 2009. Because our motion to stay will depend upon the Supreme Courts ruling, the District Court has stayed its proceedings until the Supreme Court
rules on plaintiffs motion for leave to appeal. The hearing on plaintiffs motion in the Supreme Court is set for January 11, 2010. At this time, we have not recorded any liabilities for this action as we are unable to estimate any potential liability.
Certain of the foregoing cases are still in the preliminary stages, and we are not able to quantify the extent of our potential liability, if any. An unfavorable outcome in any of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. In addition, defending these legal proceedings is likely to be costly and may divert managements attention from the day-to-day operations of our business.
We have responded to inquiries and provided information and documents related to the restatement of our fiscal year 2007 interim financial statements to the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, the New York Stock Exchange and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. The SEC interviewed several current and former officers and employees.
On February 18, 2009, we received a Wells Notice from the SEC in connection with the investigation by the staff of the SECs Division of Enforcement (the Staff) notifying us that the Staff intends to recommend that the SEC bring a civil injunctive action against us, alleging violations of the federal securities laws arising from the restatement of our fiscal year 2007 interim financial statements. We submitted our response to the Wells Notice on March 18, 2009. On September 1, 2009, without admitting or denying the SECs allegations, we agreed to a permanent injunction against future violations of certain reporting, books and records and internal accounting control provisions of the federal securities laws. No other charge or monetary penalty was assessed against us, and we cooperated fully with the Commissions investigation. This settlement, which was approved by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in November 2009, concluded the SECs investigation of this matter with respect to us.
We are subject to various other legal proceedings related to commercial, customer, and employment matters that have arisen during the ordinary course of business. Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate disposition of these matters, our management has determined, based upon the information available at the date of these financial statements, that the expected outcome of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our common stock has been quoted on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol PAY since April 29, 2005. Prior to that time, there was no public market for our stock.
The following table sets forth for the indicated periods, the high and low sale prices of our common stock.
On October 30, 2009, the closing sale price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $13.30 and on December 15, 2009, the closing sale price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $15.46. As of December 15, 2009, there were approximately 40 stockholders of record. Because many shares of our common stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of stockholders, we are unable to estimate the total number of stockholders represented by these holders of record.
We have not declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock in our most recent four full fiscal years. We do not expect to pay any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain any future earnings to finance our operations and growth. Any future determination to pay cash dividends will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will be dependent on earnings, financial condition, operating results, capital requirements, any contractual restrictions, and other factors that our board of directors deems relevant. In addition, our Credit Facility contains limitations on the ability of our principal operating subsidiary, VeriFone, Inc., to declare and pay cash dividends. Because we conduct our business through our subsidiaries, as a practical matter these restrictions similarly limit our ability to pay dividends on our common stock.
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
Information with respect to Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation may be found in Item 12 Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters Equity Compensation Plan Information, which section is incorporated herein by reference.
The following graph and table:
The information provided above under the heading Performance Graph shall not be considered filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes and Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included elsewhere in this report. The selected data in this section is not intended to replace the consolidated financial statements.
This section and other parts of this Form 10-K contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as anticipates, expects, believes, intends, potential, continues, plans, predicts, and similar terms. Such forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, and projections about our industry, and managements beliefs and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and our actual results may differ significantly from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in Item 1A Risk Factors above. The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. Unless required by law, we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
We are a global leader in secure electronic payment solutions. We provide system solutions and services that add value to the point of sale and back-office systems for financial, retail, hospitality, petroleum, government, transportation and healthcare vertical markets. We are one of the largest providers of electronic payment systems worldwide. We believe that we benefit from a number of competitive advantages gained through our 28-year history of success in our industry. These advantages include our globally trusted brand name, large installed base, significant involvement in the development of industry standards, global operating scale, customizable platforms, and investment in research and development. We believe that these advantages position us well to capitalize on the continuing global shift toward electronic payment transactions.
Our industrys growth continues to be driven by the long-term shift toward electronic payment transactions and away from cash and checks in addition to changes in security standards that require more advanced electronic payment systems. Internationally, growth rates have continued to be higher because of the relatively low penetration rates of electronic payment transactions in many countries as well as governmental efforts to modernize economies and use electronic payments as a means of improving collection of value-added tax (VAT) and sales tax. Recently, additional factors have driven growth, including the shift from dial up to internet protocol (IP), developments in wireless communications, personal identification number (PIN) based debit transactions and advances in computing technology which enable vertical solutions and non-payment applications to reside at the point of sale (POS). Most recently, there have been well publicized breaches of POS and back-office systems that handle consumer card details, spurring widespread interest in more secure payment terminals and end-to-end encryption technology.
Revenues recognized in our fiscal quarters have tended to be back-end weighted as we receive sales orders and deliver our System Solutions toward the end of each fiscal quarter. This back-end weighting of orders may adversely affect our results of operations in a number of ways and could negatively impact revenues and profits. First, the product mix of orders may not align with the forecast provided to our contract manufacturers, internal manufacturing site or component suppliers, and we could experience a shortage of the components needed for production. Second, existing manufacturing capacity may not be sufficient to deliver a high volume of orders in a concentrated time at quarter-end. Third, back-end weighted demand could negatively impact gross margins through higher labor, delivery and other manufacturing costs. If, on the other hand, we were to manage the fulfillment of back-end weighted orders through holding increased inventory levels, higher inventory obsolescence charges could occur.
Because timing of our revenue recognition depends on timing of product shipments, decisions we make about product shipments, particularly toward the end of a fiscal quarter, may impact our reported revenues. The timing of product shipments may depend on a number of factors, including price discussions with our customers, operating costs, including costs of air shipments if required, delivery date requested by customers and our
operating capacity to fill orders and ship products, as well as our long and short-term business plan, all of which may affect timing of shipment as well as revenues recognized for a particular period.
Security has become a driving factor in our business as our customers endeavor to meet ever escalating governmental requirements directed toward the prevention of identity theft as well as operating safeguards imposed by the credit and debit card associations, of which include Visa International (Visa), MasterCard Worldwide (MasterCard), American Express, Discover Financial Services, and JCB Co., Ltd. (JCB) are members. In September 2006, these card associations established the PCI SSC to oversee and unify industry standards in the areas of credit card data security. Standards include PCI-PED for pin entry devices, PCI-DSS for enterprise data security and PA-DSS for payment application data security. We are a leader in providing systems and software solutions that meet these standards.
We operate in two business segments: North America and International. We define North America as the United States and Canada, and International as all other countries from which we derive revenues.
Throughout fiscal year 2009 demand for wireless, IP-enabled, PIN-based debit and enhanced security systems was adversely affected by the global financial crisis. Specifically, we experienced lower North American demand as retailers closed redundant or underperforming locations and lower International demand due to the adverse foreign currency impact on the purchasing power of certain International customers. With the exception of China, emerging markets declined at a greater rate than developed markets in fiscal year 2009. To the extent the worldwide economic recession continues, we expect demand in certain emerging economies such as China to grow faster relative to our developed markets, but other emerging market economies perform worse than developed markets due to weak commodity prices and political instability. We continue to devote research and development (R&D) resources to address the market needs of both emerging and developed economies.
Results of Operations
We generate net revenues through the sale of our electronic payment systems and solutions that enable electronic transactions, which we identify as System Solutions, and to a lesser extent, warranty and support services, field deployment, installation and upgrade services, and customer specific application development, which we identify as Services.
Net revenues, which include System Solutions and Services, are summarized in the following table (in thousands, except percentages):
System Solutions Revenues
System Solutions net revenues decreased $79.8 million, or 9.9%, to $727.7 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 from $807.5 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. System Solutions net revenues comprised 86.1% of total net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 as compared to 87.6% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008.
International System Solutions net revenues for the year ended October 31, 2009 decreased $67.8 million, or 13.4%, compared to the year ended October 31, 2008, primarily due to a $45.5 million, or 26.1% decline in Latin
America and a $33.0 million, or 12.5% decrease in Europe, partially offset by a $10.7 million, or 15.8% increase in Asia. In Latin America, the decreases in System Solutions net revenues were primarily driven by decreased sales in Brazil and Venezuela due to the economic contraction and falling local currencies throughout most of the year, and a reduction in purchasing from one large Brazilian customer for the first three quarters of fiscal year 2009. In Europe, the decline was primarily attributable to the weak economic conditions in Russia and Spain, partially offset by growth relating to shipments to new financial customers in the United Kingdom and certain Nordic countries. Asia revenue growth was predominately attributable to revenue growth in China, where our sales have been less impacted than other countries by the global recession.
North America System Solutions net revenues for the year ended October 31, 2009 decreased $12.0 million or 4.0% compared to the year ended October 31, 2008, primarily due to a decrease in our U.S. Financial business and Canada revenues. Our U.S. Financial business, which sells payment systems to small and medium sized businesses through ISOs and payment processors, was constrained overall due to persistent adverse economic conditions which have slowed retail store openings. Multi-lane retail System Solutions sales were approximately flat as the majority of large customers completed their upgrade programs and sales activity diminished in the second half of the fiscal year. Partially offsetting this decline was an increase in Petroleum System Solutions revenues as this customer group in the second half of the fiscal year began to address the July 2010 PCI-PED compliance deadlines.
The weakened macroeconomic environment negatively impacted our net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009. Although more recently there have been some signs of improvement in the functioning of financial markets and economic conditions, we are unable to predict the likely duration of such improvements in the U.S. and other countries. A subsequent deterioration of such conditions, if persistent, would adversely impact our business, operating results, and financial condition.
System Solutions net revenues increased $15.2 million, or 1.9%, to $807.5 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 from $792.3 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. System Solutions net revenues comprised 87.6% of total net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 as compared to 87.8% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007.
International System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 increased $56.3 million, or 12.5%, to $506.9 million compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. Latin American net revenues increased $31.6 million, or 22.1% to $174.6 million, European net revenues increased $19.4 million, or 7.9%, to $264.6 million, and net revenues in Asia increased $5.3 million, or 8.5%, to $67.7 million, compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. In Latin America, our System Solutions net revenues from Brazil financial markets were favorably impacted by the public offering of one of our largest Brazilian customers and increased demand in Brazil for prepaid top-ups, medical and healthcare system solutions. Mexico revenues declined due to a less favorable tax regime relating to a government sponsored terminalization program. European net revenues increased slightly due to improved supply chain and sales execution compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. However, revenues were adversely impacted by increased pricing competition from our principal competitors in Europe and Latin America and local competitors in Asia.
North America System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 decreased $41.2 million, or 12.0%, to $300.6 million compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. The largest declines were in the U.S. Financial business and Petroleum System Solutions business. Our U.S. Financial business was constrained overall due to adverse economic conditions which slowed retail store openings. Petroleum Solutions sales continued to decline due to an unfavorable economic climate and high petroleum prices for the majority of the year which affected the retail Petroleum market. The decline in revenue was partially offset by strong sales in multi-lane retail, reflecting deployments which address enhanced PCI-DSS requirements.
Services net revenues increased $2.6 million, or 2.3% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to the growth in our European software maintenance and extended warranty services, partially offset by a reduction in custom software projects for our Petroleum customers.
Services net revenues increased $3.9 million, or 3.5%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. During this period we experienced International service revenue growth in Brazil and Asia which was partially offset by a decline in European refurbishment contracts. North America revenue growth was approximately flat with higher taxicab related services offsetting a decline in Petroleum related services.
The following table shows the gross profit and gross profit percentages for System Solutions and Services (in thousands, except percentages):
Gross profit on System Solutions decreased $20.2 million, or 8.0% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, primarily because of lower revenue levels. Gross profit on System Solutions represented 31.8% and 31.1%, respectively, of System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009 and 2008. For the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, our International gross profit percentage improved modestly, our North America gross profit percentage declined slightly and our Corporate costs as a percentage of revenue decreased compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008.
International gross profit percentage improved during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily as a result of a lower mix of sales to certain emerging markets where gross profit percentages are typically lower than gross profit percentages for developed market sales. Additionally, International gross margin benefited from improved sales and operational execution in the United Kingdom. Partially offsetting these improvements was a lower average selling price in Latin America, in part due to the declining purchasing power of customers who experienced currency devaluations and in part due to a program to sell slow moving inventory in the first six months of our fiscal year ended October 31, 2009.
North America System Solutions gross profit percentage declined slightly during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 as sales shifted away from wireless solutions, which typically carry higher than average gross profit percentages and toward lower margin landline solutions. We also experienced increased price competition in our high-end landline financial solutions and a shift in product mix toward lower margin product in our Petroleum business.
Corporate costs are comprised of non-cash acquisition charges, including amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets, and other Corporate charges, including inventory obsolescence and scrap, rework, specific warranty provisions, non-standard freight, over-and-under absorption of materials management and supply chain engineering overhead. Since these costs are generally incurred on a company-wide basis, it is
impractical to allocate them to either the North America or International segment. The decrease in Corporate costs for fiscal year 2009 was primarily a result of a $11.8 million reduction in amortization of core and developed technology assets, a $2.2 million reversal of a warranty claim associated with an acquired product, and a $1.3 million reduction in amortization of step-down in deferred revenue on acquisition. Partially offsetting this decrease was an increase of $11.1 million of excess and obsolescence provision in the first half of fiscal year 2009 in conjunction with the changing demand we experienced in the first half of fiscal year 2009 as a result of the deteriorating macroeconomic environment.
Gross profit on System Solutions increased $5.1 million, or 2.1%, to $251.4 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 from $246.3 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. Gross profit on System Solutions represented 31.1% of System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2008 and 2007. Year over year declines in the gross profit percentages in both North America and International segments were offset by a reduction in Corporate costs during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008.
North America gross profit percentage for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 declined compared to fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 primarily due to the growth in Multi-lane System Solutions, which tends to carry lower than average gross margins, and the lower proportion of Petroleum System Solution sales, which tend to carry higher than average gross margins. In addition, during fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 we experienced pricing pressure in both landline and wireless financial solutions. Partially offsetting these decreases was the reduction of sales of a low margin legacy check processing solution for which sales effectively terminated in the first quarter of fiscal year ended October 31, 2007.
International gross profit percentage for fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 declined compared to fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 due to increased price competition in emerging markets countries, including Russia, China, Turkey and Brazil. In addition, certain customers purchased non-PCI compliant inventory at significant discounts. Furthermore, revenues in Latin America, which have historically carried gross margins below International averages, increased proportionally in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007.
The overall gross profit percentage for fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 was also negatively impacted by the higher proportion of International net revenues, which typically carry a lower margin than North American net revenues.
Corporate costs for fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 decreased as a percentage of System Solutions net revenues compared to fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 primarily due to a $13.8 million decrease in amortization of inventory step-up and a $5.7 million decrease in amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets as a result of the Lipman acquisition. These amortization expenses amounted to 4.0% of System Solutions net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to 6.5% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. In addition, there was a $11.7 million decrease in excess and obsolescence charges and provisions for purchase of excess components from contract manufacturers, reflecting a reduction in non-PCI related inventory in fiscal year 2008 compared to fiscal year 2007.
Gross profit on Services increased $9.3 million, or 22.4%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. Gross profit represented 43.5% of Services net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, compared to 36.3% of Services net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. The majority of this increase was attributable to the improved operational efficiencies in our London service center, cost reduction initiatives associated with our North American call center, and a favorable service mix.
Gross profit on Services decreased $11.3 million, or 21.4%, to $41.6 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, from $52.9 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. Gross profit on Services represented 36.3% of Services net revenues for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, as compared to 47.9% for
the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. This decline was primarily due to unfavorable service mix within Europe and, to a lesser extent, a revenue shift towards Latin America and Asia, where gross profit percentages are generally below the International average. In North America, the gross profit percentage declined slightly due to a decline in higher margin upgrade services.
We expect the gross profit percentages, both System Solutions and Services, of our International segment to continue to be lower than the comparable gross profit percentages in our North America segment.
Research and Development Expenses
R&D expenses for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 are summarized in the following table (in thousands, except percentages):
R&D expenses for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, decreased $10.5 million, or 13.9%, compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, primarily driven by a $5.2 million decrease in personnel and outside services costs and a $1.9 million decrease in expenditure for engineering supplies and materials. These decreases were due to the cancelling of certain R&D projects as a result of lower anticipated demand caused by the economic downturn, cost reductions in response to global recession and increased savings as a result of favorable foreign currency exchange rates. Additionally, a $0.9 million reduction in restructuring costs in fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 and the non-recurrence of a $2.7 million write-off of capitalized software recorded in fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 contributed to the decrease in R&D expenses.
R&D expenses increased $10.2 million or 15.6% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the year ended October 31, 2007 primarily due to a $7.4 million increase in personnel costs resulting from higher headcount and the impact of less favorable currency exchange rates on our expenditures, $1.8 million in restructuring costs, and a $2.7 million write-off of capitalized software development costs due to a change in our approach to the French market. In addition, expenditures for R&D materials and supplies increased by $1.0 million to support our ongoing R&D efforts. These increases were partially offset by a $1.0 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense.
We expect research and development expenses, assuming a stable currency environment, to grow modestly as we address business opportunities in certain markets where we believe economic growth and demand are relatively less affected by the global recession.
Sales and Marketing Expenses
Sales and marketing expenses for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 are summarized in the following table (in thousands, except percentages):
Sales and marketing expenses decreased $17.9 million, or 19.6%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to a $10.4 million decrease in personnel and outside services costs from a global reduction in headcount in sales and marketing, and a $5.3 million decrease in spending on travel, trade shows, events and marketing communications. These reductions were initiated in
response to the global economic crisis. In addition, we experienced a favorable foreign exchange rate impact and a $1.8 million decrease in restructuring expense. These decreases were partially offset by a $1.3 million net increase in stock-based compensation expense.
Sales and marketing expenses decreased $4.8 million or 5.0% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 mainly as a result of a $3.4 million reduction in expenses from lower trade show and marketing communication activities, a $2.8 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense, and $1.9 million in lower personnel costs. The decreases were partially offset by a $2.8 million increase in restructuring costs in fiscal year 2008 compared to fiscal year 2007.
We expect sales and marketing expenses, assuming a stable currency environment, to grow modestly as we address business opportunities in certain markets where we believe economic growth and demand are relatively less affected by the global recession.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007 are summarized in the following table (in thousands, except percentages):
General and administrative expenses decreased $50.2 million, or 39.6%, in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to the non-recurrence of $41.8 million of expenses related to the restatement of our 2007 interim financial results incurred in the fiscal year 2008 and a reversal of a $7.2 million Lipman pre-acquisition contingency accrual for a Brazilian importation tax assessment that was dismissed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2009. Additionally, fiscal year 2009 general and administrative expenses were also impacted by a $4.9 million reduction in outside services costs and a $1.8 million decrease in travel expense, both driven by cost reduction initiatives. Partially offsetting these decreases were a $3.4 million net increase in stock-based compensation expense mainly as a result of the surrender of certain employee stock options and a $1.2 million increase in restructuring and accelerated depreciation expenses.
General and administrative expenses increased $45.9 million, or 56.9%, in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007. The increase was primarily due to $41.8 million in costs related to our 2007 quarterly restatement and the independent investigation. Additional increases consisted of a $5.4 million increase in professional services fees consisting primarily of higher audit and litigation fees, a $5.8 million increase in personnel costs to address restatement activities and the remediation of control weaknesses, a $2.4 million increase in restructuring costs and a $2.0 million expense for potential settlement of ongoing litigation. Furthermore, we incurred a $2.7 million increase in travel expenses and a $2.8 million increase in depreciation and maintenance costs primarily as a result of the November 2007 Oracle implementation. These increases were partially offset by the non-recurrence of $10.2 million of integration expenses incurred during fiscal year 2007 relating to the acquisition of Lipman and restructuring charges in VeriFone entities, a $5.7 million decrease in stock-based compensation, and a $2.4 million decrease in bad debt expenses due to a more favorable collections experience.
We expect general and administrative expenses, assuming a stable currency environment, to increase in the future both as the result of the non-recurrence of the reversal of the Lipman pre-acquisition contingency accrual recorded in fiscal year 2009, an additional $3.0 million in restructuring and accelerated depreciation expenses resulting from our decision to outsource our Israeli in-house manufacturing to Sanmina-SCI Corporation in fiscal year 2010 and higher legal expenses.
Impairment of Goodwill and Intangible Assets
We performed our annual impairment test of goodwill as of August 1, 2009 and 2008 in accordance with ASC 350 (formerly SFAS No. 142), neither of which resulted in an impairment of goodwill.
Subsequent to the annual impairment test as of August 1, 2008 for fiscal year 2008, in light of our disappointing operating results for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008 due to severe macro-economic conditions caused by the illiquidity of the credit markets, difficulties in the banking and financial services sectors, falling consumer confidence and rising unemployment rates, we reduced our projected future cash flows significantly. This resulted in an indicator of possible impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets as defined under ASC 350 (formerly SFAS No. 142) and ASC 360 (formerly SFAS No. 144), requiring us to perform an impairment test as of October 15, 2008. Following this impairment test, we recorded impairment charges of $262.5 million for goodwill for our EMEA reporting unit and $26.6 million for developed and core technology intangible assets in the International segment during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008.
We determined the recoverability of the long-lived assets under ASC 360 (formerly SFAS No. 144) based on their undiscounted estimated future net cash flows and the impairment charge based on fair value using discounted cash flows.
During November 2008, the macroeconomic environment worldwide continued to weaken in face of further and more severe illiquidity in the credit markets, difficulties in the banking and financial services sectors, as well as persistent declines in consumer confidence and increases in unemployment rates on a global level. We experienced a further significant decline in our stock price and market capitalization, which was considered an indicator of possible impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets triggering the necessity of an additional impairment test as of December 1, 2008.
As a result of the December 1, 2008 goodwill impairment test, we concluded that the carrying amount of our North America and Asia reporting units exceeded their implied fair values and recorded an estimated impairment charge of $178.2 million in the Corporate segment during the first quarter of fiscal year 2009 for these reporting units. We finalized the goodwill evaluation process and recorded a $2.7 million reduction to the estimated impairment charge during the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. The final impairment charge for the North America and Asia reporting units was $175.5 million. The net carrying value of goodwill in North America and International segments was reduced by $65.6 million and $109.9 million, respectively, as a result of the impairment charges recorded in the first and second quarters of fiscal year 2009. See Note 2. Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets for additional information.
The long-lived assets impairment tests did not result in any significant impairment charges in fiscal year 2009.
Amortization of Purchased Intangible Assets
Amortization of purchased intangible assets decreased $5.6 million, or 21.5% in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. As a result of our impairment analysis in October 2008, we recorded a $26.6 million impairment charge in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008 related to the write-down to fair value of the net carrying value of certain developed and core technology intangible assets. The decrease in amortization of purchased intangible assets for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 was primarily attributable to the lower carrying value of the purchased intangible assets subsequent to the recognition of the above-mentioned impairment charge.
Amortization of purchased intangible assets increased $4.5 million, or 20.7%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to fiscal year 2007 primarily due to the fluctuation of foreign currency exchange rates.
In-Process Research and Development (IPR&D)
We recognized IPR&D expense of $6.8 million during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 in connection with our Lipman acquisition. The products considered to be IPR&D were in our consumer-activated and countertop communication modules which have subsequently reached technological feasibility.
Interest expense decreased $15.9 million in the year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the year ended October 31, 2008 primarily attributable to lower effective interest rates on our Term-B loan as LIBOR rates continue to decline substantially over fiscal year 2009 and the reversal of $5.1 million of accrued interest related to a Lipman pre-acquisition contingency accrual for the Brazilian importation tax assessment that was dismissed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2009. See Note 12. Commitment and Contingencies for additional information.
Interest expense decreased $8.2 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 mostly attributable to the lower effective interest rates in fiscal year 2008 compared to fiscal year 2007. In June 2007, we repaid an aggregate of $263.8 million of our Term B Loan which had an interest rate of 7.11% with a portion of the proceeds from the issuance of the Senior Convertible Notes which bear interest at a rate of 1.375%.
In May 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position APB 14-1, Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement) (or ASC 470-20), which requires the issuer of a convertible debt instrument with cash settlement features to account separately for the liability and equity components of the instrument. The debt would be recognized at the present value of our cash flows discounted using an entity specific nonconvertible debt borrowing rate at the time of issuance. The equity component would be recognized as the difference between the proceeds from the issuance of the note and the fair value of the liability. The standard also requires accretion of the resultant debt discount over the expected life of the debt. This accounting standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those years. Entities are required to apply this standard retrospectively for all periods presented. We adopted FSP APB 14-1 (ASC 470-20) at the beginning of fiscal year 2010 and modified our accounting for our 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes (Notes). On the date of issuance of the Notes on June 22, 2007, approximately $80.0 million of the proceeds was allocated to equity in a manner that reflects market interest rate for a similar nonconvertible debt at the date of issuance. This equity amount will be accreted from the date of issuance to June 2012 as non-cash interest charges. The retroactive interest expense for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 is expected to be approximately $14.0 million, $14.0 million and $5.0 million, respectively. The gain on debt extinguishment will be reduced from $13.1 million to approximately $7.0 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009. The interest expense for fiscal year 2010 will be approximately $15.0 million.
Interest income decreased $4.5 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. The decrease was attributable to the lower effective interest rates during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 partially offset by the impact of higher average cash balances.
Interest income decreased $0.7 million in the year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the year ended October 31, 2007. This decrease was attributable to the impact of lower effective interest rates during fiscal year 2008 compared to fiscal year 2007.
Other Income (Expense), net
Other income (expense), net increased $24.5 million during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 mainly due to a $13.1 million gain on extinguishment of debt
and a $9.3 million reduction in foreign exchange losses. In April 2009, we repurchased and extinguished $33.5 million par value of our outstanding 1.375% Convertible Notes for $19.8 million, excluding accrued interest paid. As a result, we realized a $13.1 million gain on these transactions, net of a $0.6 million write-off of related deferred debt issuance costs. The reduction in foreign exchange losses was primarily attributable to the non-recurrence of a $5.1 million foreign exchange loss recorded in fiscal year 2008 as a result of an un-hedged Israeli tax accrual and improved effectiveness of our foreign currency hedging programs in fiscal year 2009.
Other income (expense), net increased $5.3 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 predominately resulting from a $9.0 million increase in foreign currency exchange loss and a $2.2 million impairment of equity investment primarily as a result of the investee being insolvent which were partially offset by the non-recurrence of a $4.8 million write-off of debt issuance expense as a result of the extinguishment of debt during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007.
Provision for Income Taxes
We recorded a provision for income taxes of $9.2 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to a provision for income taxes of $73.9 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008. The decrease in the provision for income taxes was primarily attributable to the recording of a full valuation allowance in the U.S. during fiscal 2008 and as such we recorded a significant deferred tax expense for the write off of all U.S. deferred tax assets. The tax provision for the year ended October 31, 2009 primarily reflects taxes for profitable jurisdictions. It also reflects the benefit of U.S. loss carrybacks and the reversal of the U.S. federal and state deferred tax liabilities related to goodwill as a result of the current years goodwill impairment in the U.S.
As of October 31, 2009, we remain in a net deferred tax liability position. The realization of the deferred tax assets is primarily dependent on our ability to generate sufficient U.S. and foreign taxable income in future periods. We have determined that it is not more likely than not the deferred tax assets in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions will be realized and as such we continue to record a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets as of October 31, 2009 in those jurisdictions. The amount of deferred tax assets considered realizable may increase or decrease in subsequent quarters as we re-evaluate the underlying basis for our estimates of future domestic and certain foreign taxable income.
Pursuant to the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 enacted on November 4, 2009, we will be able to carryback all U.S. loss carryforwards generated in fiscal year 2009 to prior years and obtain cash tax refunds. This law was enacted after our year-end and as such this future benefit will be reflected in the first quarter tax provision for the year ending October 31, 2010.
We are currently being audited by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for our fiscal years 2003 to 2004. Although we believe that we have correctly provided income taxes for the years subject to audit, the IRS may adopt different interpretations. We have not yet received any final determinations with respect to this audit although certain adjustments have been agreed with the IRS, none of which have a material impact to the current period income tax provision. Our subsidiaries are also under audit by the Israeli tax authorities for calendar years 2004 to 2006 and the Brazilian federal government for all periods subsequent to January 1, 2003. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to tax examination outside of the U.S. for periods prior to 2001.
Effective November 1, 2007, we adopted ASC 740 (formally FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes). We have recorded our ASC 740 liability as a long-term liability as we do not expect significant payments to occur over the next 12 months. Our existing tax positions will continue to generate an increase in liabilities for uncertain tax benefits. We will continue to recognize interest and penalties related to income tax matters in income tax expense. The amount of unrecognized tax benefits could be reduced upon closure of tax examinations or if the statute of limitations on certain tax filings expires without assessment from the tax authorities. We believe that it is reasonably possible that there could be a reduction in unrecognized tax benefits due to statute of limitation expirations in multiple tax jurisdictions during the next 12 months of zero
to $3.0 million. Interest and penalties accrued on these uncertain tax positions will also be released upon the expiration of statutes of limitations.
We operate in two business segments: North America and International. We define North America as the United States and Canada, and International as the other countries from which we derive revenues.
Net revenues and operating income (loss) of each business segment reflect net revenues generated within the segment, supply chain standard inventory cost of System Solutions net revenues, actual cost of Services net revenues, and expenses that directly benefit only that segment, including distribution center costs, royalty and warranty expense. Corporate net revenues and operating income (loss) reflect non-cash acquisition charges, including amortization of purchased core and developed technology assets, step-down in deferred revenue, impairment and other Corporate charges, including inventory obsolescence and scrap, rework, specific warranty provisions, non-standard freight and over-and-under absorption of materials management overhead.
In fiscal year 2009, we revised the methodology for business segment operating income (loss) reporting. Local inventory obsolescence and scrap costs previously recorded in International and North America segments were reclassified to the Corporate segment. The following table sets forth net revenues and operating income (loss), as revised, for our segments (in thousands):
nm- not meaningful
International total net revenues decreased $62.8 million, or 11.1%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 as compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to a $67.8 million decrease in System Solutions net revenues partially offset by a $5.0 million increase in Services net revenues. See discussion under Results of Operations Net Revenues.
International operating income increased $6.8 million, or 6.2%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 due to the overall decrease in operating expenses partially offset by a decline in gross margin largely attributable to the $62.8 million decrease in total net revenues.
Net revenues increased $58.3 million, or 11.5%, in International for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 as compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 primarily driven by a $56.3 million increase in System Solutions net revenues.
The decrease in International operating income for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 was mainly due to a lower gross profit percentage and higher operating expenses.
North America Segment
North America total net revenues decreased $15.7 million, or 4.4%, for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 as compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to a $12.0 million decrease in Systems Solutions net revenues and a $3.7 million decrease in Services net revenues. See Results of Operations Net Revenues.
North America operating income decreased $1.5 million, or 1.3%, for the year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 mainly due to a decline in gross margin primarily attributable to the decrease in total revenues and a decline in gross margin percentage. The decrease in gross margin was partially offset by a decrease in operating expenses.
Net revenues decreased $41.3 million, or 10.3%, in North America for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 as compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 primarily driven by a decrease in System Solutions. See Results of Operations Net Revenues.
The decrease in operating income for North America for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 was mainly due to lower revenues and lower gross profit percentage, partially offset by lower operating expenses. See Results of Operations Gross Profit.
Corporate operating loss decreased $181.6 million, or 33.4% for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily due to $113.6 million in lower goodwill and purchased intangible assets impairment charges, the non-recurrence of $41.8 million in restatement costs related to the restatement of the fiscal year 2007 interim financial results incurred in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, a $17.4 million reduction in amortization of purchased intangibles assets, a $12.2 million decrease in general operating expenses, a $7.2 million reversal of the Lipman pre-acquisition contingency accrual for the Brazilian importation tax assessment that was dismissed in the third quarter of fiscal year 2009, a $2.2 million reversal of a warranty claim associated with an acquired product and a $2.4 million decrease in restructuring expenses. These decreases were partially offset by a $11.1 million increase in excess and obsolescence and scrap charges as a result of the deteriorating macroeconomic environment, a $5.0 million net increase in stock-based compensation due primarily to the surrender of certain stock option grants, and a $2.6 million increase in product situation warranty reserves.
The increase in Corporate operating loss for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 compared to the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 was primarily a result of a $289.1 million impairment charge for goodwill and developed and core technology intangible assets due to lower revenue expectations in light of current operating performance and future operating expectations, $41.8 million in costs related to the independent investigation and restatement, $11.0 million in restructuring costs and a $11.3 million increase in personnel expense largely attributable to restatement and remediation activities and the impact of unfavorable exchange rates. These increases were partially offset by the non-recurrence of $20.6 million of amortization of step-up in inventory and IPR&D write-off, the non-recurrence of $11.1 million of integration expenses relating to the acquisition of Lipman and restructuring charges, and a $11.0 million decrease in stock-based compensation expense. Additionally, corporate supply chain costs decreased $14.4 million primarily due to lower write-offs of inventory, less scrap and a decrease in the accrual of liabilities to purchase excess components from contract manufacturers compared to fiscal year ended October 31, 2007 when we took significant provisions for non-PCI compliant inventory and components.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary liquidity and capital resource needs are to service our debt, finance working capital, and to make capital expenditures and investments. At October 31, 2009, our primary sources of liquidity were cash and cash equivalents of $325.0 million and $25.0 million was available to us under our revolving credit facility. During fiscal year 2009, we repurchased $33.5 million principal of our 1.375% Convertible Notes in open market transactions. We may also in the future execute further voluntary repurchases of our 1.375% Convertible Notes if the market conditions are favorable, we have funds available to execute such repurchases and when the financial covenants under our Credit Facility allow us to do so.
Net cash flow from operating activities was $202.6 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009.
Cash provided by operations before changes in working capital amounted to $101.0 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 and consisted of a $137.8 million net loss adjusted for $238.8 million of non-cash items consisting primarily of impairment of goodwill and purchased intangible assets, amortization of purchased intangible assets, stock-based compensation expense, depreciation and amortization of property, plant, and equipment, gain on reversal of a Lipman pre-acquisition contingency and gain on extinguishment of debt.
Changes in working capital resulted in a $101.6 million increase in cash and cash equivalents during the year ended October 31, 2009. The main drivers of this increase were as follows:
Cash used in operations before changes in working capital amounted to $21.7 million for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 and consisted of a $425.3 million net loss adjusted for $447.0 million of non-cash items such as impairment of goodwill and intangible assets, impairment of equity investments, amortization of purchased intangible assets, stock-based compensation expense, depreciation and amortization of property, plant, and equipment, amortization of debt issuance costs and loss on write-off of capitalized software.
Changes in working capital resulted in a $30.3 million decrease in cash and cash equivalents during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily driven by a $60.6 million increase in inventories reflecting lower than expected System Solutions revenues, a strategic decision to increase inventory for certain products to ensure adequate quantity on hand, and an increase in inventory of MX Multi-lane Retail products based on sales projections and a $3.2 million increase in prepaid and other assets, partially offset by a $24.6 million decrease in accounts receivable due to improved collections, a $6.7 million increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses and other liabilities and a $5.2 million increase in deferred revenue.
Cash used in investing activities was $16.0 million in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009, and primarily consisted of $9.7 million in purchases of property, plant and equipment, $2.3 million used in capitalized software development costs and $2.7 million related to an equity investment in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2009.
Cash used in investing activities was $37.8 million in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008, and primarily consisted of $17.6 million in purchases of property, plant and equipment, $15.8 million used in business acquisitions, net of cash acquired, and $4.5 million in capitalized software development costs.
The $24.6 million of cash used in financing activities in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2009 primarily consisted of a $33.8 million repayment of debt and advances against bankers acceptances partially offset by $8.6 million of proceeds from advances against bankers acceptances. The $33.8 million repayment of debt primarily consisted of $19.8 million used to purchase a portion of our outstanding 1.375% Convertible Notes, $5.0 million of Term B loan repayments and $8.6 million of repayments of advances against bankers acceptances.
The $2.2 million of cash used in financing activities in the fiscal year ended October 31, 2008 primarily consisted of $8.2 million repayment of debt and a $1.6 million debt amendment fee which were partially offset by $3.0 million of receipts from the exercise of stock options, $3.4 million proceeds from debt and $1.2 million from the tax benefit derived from stock-based compensation.
Our future capital requirements may vary significantly from prior periods as well as from those currently planned. These requirements will depend on a number of factors, including operating factors such as our terms and payment experience with customers and investments we may make in product or market development such as our current investments in expanding our International operations. As noted above, we may also in the future execute further voluntary repurchases of our convertible debt. Finally, our capital needs may be significantly affected by any acquisition we may make in the future. Based upon our current level of operations, we believe that we have the financial resources to meet our business requirements for the next year, including capital expenditures, working capital requirements, and future strategic investments, and to comply with our financial covenants.
Secured Credit Facility
On October 31, 2006, our principal subsidiary, VeriFone Inc., entered into a credit agreement (the Credit Facility) consisting of a Term B Loan facility of $500.0 million and a revolving loan permitting borrowings of up to $40.0 million. The proceeds from the Term B loan were used to repay all outstanding amounts relating to a previous credit facility, pay certain transaction costs, and partially fund the cash consideration in connection with the acquisition of Lipman on November 1, 2006. We repaid $5.0 million, $5.0 million and $263.7 million during fiscal years 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, leaving a Term B Loan balance of $226.3 million at October 31, 2009. As of October 31, 2009 and 2008, there were no outstanding balances on the revolving loan. The Credit Facility is guaranteed by us and certain of our subsidiaries and is secured by collateral including substantially all of our assets and stock of our subsidiaries.
During fiscal year 2008, we entered into three amendments to the Credit Facility with our lenders, which extended the time periods for delivery of certain required financial information for the three-month periods ended January 31, April 30 and July 31, 2007, the year ended October 31, 2007 and the three-month periods ended January 31, 2008 and April 30, 2008. In connection with the three amendments, we paid a total fee of $1.6 million and agreed to certain increases in the interest rates and fees in fiscal year 2008.
Lehman Commercial Paper, Inc. (Lehman CP), a lender in the revolving loan, declared bankruptcy in October 2008. Under the terms of the Credit Facility, we declared Lehman CP a defaulting lender and removed Lehman CP as a lender in the revolving loan. Therefore, as of October 31, 2009 and October 31, 2008, $25.0 million was available to us under the revolving loan. We do not expect to obtain a replacement lender for Lehman CP under the revolving loan.
We pay a commitment fee on the unused portion of the revolving loan credit facility at a rate that varies depending upon our consolidated total leverage ratio. We pay a commitment fee at a rate of 0.425% per annum as of October 31, 2009 and 2008.
The maturity dates on the components of the Credit Facility are October 31, 2012 for the revolving loan and October 31, 2013 for the Term B Loan. Principal payments on the Term B Loan are due in equal quarterly installments of $1.3 million over the seven-year term on the last business day of each calendar quarter with the balance due on maturity.
At our option, the Term B loan and the revolving loan can be Base Rate or Eurodollar Rate loans. Base Rate loans bear interest at a per annum rate equal to a margin over the greater of the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50% or the JP Morgan prime rate. For the Base Rate Term B loan, the margin was 1.75% as of October 31, 2009 and 2008. For the Base Rate revolving loan, the margin varies depending upon our consolidated leverage ratio and was 1.00% as of October 31, 2009 and 2008.
At our option, Eurodollar Rate loans bear interest at a margin over the one-, two-, three- or six-month LIBOR rate. The margin for the Eurodollar Rate Term B loan was 2.75% as of October 31, 2009 and 2008. The margin for the Eurodollar Rate revolving loan varies depending upon our consolidated leverage ratio and was 2.00% as of October 31, 2009 and 2008.
As of October 31, 2009, the Term B loan bore interest at 2.75% over the one-month LIBOR rate of 0.25% for a total of 3.00%. As of October 31, 2008, the Term B loan bore interest at 2.75% over the one-month LIBOR rate of 3.12% for a total of 5.87%. As of October 31, 2009 and 2008, the outstanding balance on the Term B loan was $226.3 million and $231.3 million, respectively.
As of October 31, 2009, the revolving loan credit facility bore interest at 2.00% over the one-month LIBOR rate of 0.25% for a total of 2.25%. As of October 31, 2008, the revolving loan credit facility bore interest at 2.00% over the one-month LIBOR rate of 3.12% for a total of 5.12%. As of October 31, 2009 and 2008, no amounts were outstanding under the revolving loan.
The terms of the Credit Facility require us to comply with financial covenants, including maintaining leverage and fixed charge coverage ratios at the end of each fiscal quarter. As of October 31, 2009, we were required to maintain a total leverage ratio of not greater than 3.5 to 1.0 and a fixed charge coverage ratio of at least 2.0 to 1.0. Total leverage ratio is equal to total debt less cash as of the end of a reporting fiscal quarter divided by consolidated EBITDA, as adjusted, for the most recent four consecutive fiscal quarters. Fixed charge coverage ratio is, all for the most recent four consecutive fiscal quarters, the ratio of (a) consolidated EBITDA, as adjusted, less capital expenditures, as adjusted, and cash tax payments, over (b) the sum of cash interest expense and scheduled debt payments. Some of the financial covenants become more restrictive over the term of the Credit Facility. Noncompliance with any of the financial covenants without cure or waiver would constitute an event of default under the Credit Facility. An event of default resulting from a breach of a financial covenant may
result, at the option of lenders holding a majority of the loans, in an acceleration of repayment of the principal and interest outstanding and a termination of the loan. The Credit Facility also contains non-financial covenants that restrict some of our activities, including our ability to dispose of assets, incur additional debt, pay dividends, create liens, make investments, make capital expenditures, and engage in specified transactions with affiliates. The terms of the Credit Facility permit prepayments of principal and require prepayments of principal upon the occurrence of certain events including among others, the receipt of proceeds from the sale of assets, the receipt of excess cash flow as defined, and the receipt of proceeds of certain debt issues. The Credit Facility also contains customary events of default, including defaults based on events of bankruptcy and insolvency; non payment of principal, interest, or fees when due, subject to specified grace periods; breach of specified covenants; change in control; and material inaccuracy of representations and warranties. In addition, if our leverage exceeds a certain level set out in our Credit Facility, a portion of the excess cash flows must be used to pay down our outstanding debt. We were in compliance with our financial and non-financial covenants as of October 31, 2009.
1.375% Senior Convertible Notes
On June 22, 2007, we issued and sold $316.2 million aggregate principal amount of 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes due in June 2012 (the Notes) in an offering through Lehman Brothers and JP Morgan Securities Inc. (together initial purchasers) to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Section 4(2) and Rule 144A under the Securities Act. The net proceeds from the offering, after deducting transaction costs, were approximately $307.9 million. We incurred approximately $8.3 million of debt issuance costs. The transaction costs, consisting of the initial purchasers discounts and offering expenses, were primarily recorded in debt issuance costs, net and are being amortized to interest expense using the effective interest method over five years. We will pay 1.375% interest per annum on the principal amount of the Notes, payable semi-annually in arrears in cash on June 15 and December 15 of each year, commencing on December 15, 2007, subject to increase in certain circumstances as described below.
In April 2009, we repurchased and extinguished $33.5 million par value of the outstanding Notes for $19.8 million, excluding accrued interest paid. We realized a $13.1 million gain on these transactions, net of a $0.6 million write-off of related deferred debt issuance costs. As of October 31, 2009, the remaining par value of the Notes was $282.7 million.
The Notes were issued under an Indenture (the Indenture) with U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee. Each $1,000 of principal of the Notes are initially convertible into 22.719 shares of VeriFone common stock, which is equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $44.02 per share, subject to adjustment upon the occurrence of specified events. Holders of the Notes may convert their Notes prior to maturity during specified periods as follows: (1) on any date during any fiscal quarter beginning after October 31, 2007 (and only during such fiscal quarter) if the closing sale price of our common stock was more than 130% of the then current conversion price for at least 20 trading days in the period of the 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the previous fiscal quarter; (2) at any time on or after March 15, 2012; (3) if we distribute, to all holders of our common stock, rights or warrants (other than pursuant to a rights plan) entitling them to purchase, for a period of 45 calendar days or less, shares of our common stock at a price less than the average closing sale price for the ten trading days preceding the declaration date for such distribution; (4) if we distribute, to all holders of our common stock, cash or other assets, debt securities, or rights to purchase our securities (other than pursuant to a rights plan), which distribution has a per share value exceeding 10% of the closing sale price of our common stock on the trading day preceding the declaration date for such distribution; (5) during a specified period if certain types of fundamental changes occur; or (6) during the five business-day period following any five consecutive trading-day period in which the trading price for the Notes was less than 98% of the average of the closing sale price of our common stock for each day during such five trading-day period multiplied by the then current conversion rate. Upon conversion, we would pay the holder the cash value of the applicable number of shares of our common stock, up to the principal amount of the note. Amounts in excess of the principal amount, if any, will be paid in stock.
As of October 31, 2009, none of the conditions allowing holders of the Notes to convert had been met. If a fundamental change, as defined in the Indenture, occurs prior to the maturity date, holders of the Notes may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their Notes for cash at a repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Notes to be repurchased, plus any accrued and unpaid interest (including additional interest, if any) to, but excluding, the repurchase date.
The Notes are senior unsecured obligations and rank equal in right of payment with all of our existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness. The Notes are effectively subordinated to any secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the related collateral and structurally subordinated to indebtedness and other liabilities of our subsidiaries including any secured indebtedness of such subsidiaries.
In connection with the offering of the Notes, we entered into note hedge transactions with affiliates of the initial purchasers (the counterparties), consisting of Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives (Lehman Derivatives) and JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, London Branch, whereby we have the option to purchase up to 7.2 million shares of our common stock at a price of approximately $44.02 per share. The note hedge transactions expire the earlier of the last day on which any Notes remain outstanding and June 14, 2012. The cost of the note hedge transactions was approximately $80.2 million. The note hedge transactions are intended to mitigate the potential dilution upon conversion of the Notes in the event that the volume weighted average price of our common stock on each trading day of the relevant conversion period or other relevant valuation period is greater than the applicable strike price of the convertible note hedge transactions, which initially corresponds to the conversion price of the Notes and is subject, with certain exceptions, to the adjustments applicable to the conversion price of the Notes. The note hedge transaction with Lehman Derivatives, which benefited from a guarantee by Lehman Brothers, covers 50% of the shares of our common stock potentially issuable upon conversion of the Notes. The filing by Lehman Brothers of a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in September 2008 constituted an event of default under the note hedge transaction with Lehman Derivatives, giving us the immediate right to terminate the transaction and entitling us to claim reimbursement for the loss incurred in terminating and closing out the transaction. On September 21, 2008, we delivered a notice of termination to Lehman Derivatives and claimed reimbursement for the loss incurred in termination and close-out of the transaction.
In addition, we sold warrants to the counterparties whereby they have the option to purchase up to approximately 7.2 million shares of VeriFone common stock at a price of $62.356 per share. We received approximately $31.2 million in cash proceeds from the sale of these warrants. The warrants expire progressively from December 19, 2013 to February 3, 2014.
The cost incurred in connection with the note hedge transactions, net of the related tax benefit and the proceeds from the sale of the warrants, is included as a net reduction in additional paid-in capital in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets as of October 31, 2009 and 2008, in accordance with the guidance in ASC 815-40 (formerly Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue No. 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock).
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of October 31, 2009 (in thousands):
We expect that we will be able to fund our remaining obligations and commitments with cash flows from our operations. To the extent we are unable to fund these obligations and commitments with cash flows from operations, we intend to fund these obligations and commitments with proceeds from the $25.0 million available under our revolving loan under our secured credit facility or future debt or equity financings.
We work on a purchase order basis with third-party contract manufacturers with facilities in China, Singapore and Brazil and components suppliers located throughout the world to supply a majority of our finished goods inventories, spare parts and accessories. We provide each supplier with a purchase order to cover the manufacturing requirements, which constitutes a binding commitment to purchase material produced by the manufacturer as specified in the purchase order. These purchase orders are generally considered to be non-cancelable and are expected to be paid within one year of the issuance date. The amount of purchase orders issued to contract manufacturers and component suppliers totaled approximately $66.4 million as of October 31, 2009. Of this amount, $3.8 million has been recorded in Other Current Liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets as of October 31, 2009 because the commitment is not expected to have future value to us.
We utilize a limited number of third parties to manufacture a significant portion of our products and rely upon these contract manufacturers to produce and deliver products to our customers on a timely basis and at an acceptable cost. Furthermore, a majority of our manufacturing activities is concentrated in China. As a result, disruptions to the business or operations of the contract manufacturers or to their ability to produce the required products in a timely manner, and particularly disruptions to the manufacturing facilities located in China, could significantly impact our business and operations. In addition, a number of components that are necessary to manufacture and assemble our systems are specifically customized for use in our products and are obtained from sole source suppliers on a purchase order basis. Because of the customized nature of these components and the limited number of available suppliers, it would be difficult and costly to find alternative sources in a timely manner.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
Our only off-balance sheet arrangements, as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of the SECs Regulation S-K, consist of foreign exchange forward contracts described under Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk below.
Effects of Inflation
Our monetary assets, consisting primarily of cash, cash equivalents, and receivables, are not affected by inflation because they are short-term and in the case of cash are immaterial. Our non-monetary assets, consisting primarily of inventory, intangible assets, goodwill, and prepaid expenses and other assets, are not affected significantly by inflation. We believe that replacement costs of equipment, furniture, and leasehold improvements will not materially affect our operations. However, the rate of inflation affects our cost of goods sold and expenses, such as those for employee compensation, which may not be readily recoverable in the price of system solutions and services offered by us.
Critical Accounting Polices and Estimates
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations are based upon our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S.GAAP. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our critical accounting policies and estimates. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
An accounting policy is deemed to be critical if it requires an accounting estimate to be made based on assumptions about matters that are highly uncertain at the time the estimate is made, and if different estimates that reasonably could have been used, or changes in the accounting estimates that are reasonably likely to occur periodically, could materially impact our consolidated financial statements. We believe the following critical accounting policies include our more significant estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 1. Principles of Consolidation and Significant Accounting Policies to the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Net revenues from System Solutions are recognized upon shipment, delivery, or customer acceptance of the product as required pursuant to the customer arrangement. Net revenues from services such as customer support are initially deferred and then recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract. Net revenues from services such as installations, equipment repairs, refurbishment arrangements, training, and consulting are recognized as the services are rendered. For arrangements with multiple elements, we allocate net revenues to each element using the residual method based on objective and reliable evidence of the fair value of the undelivered elements. We defer the portion of the arrangement fee equal to the objective evidence of fair value of the undelivered elements until they are delivered.
While the majority of our sales transactions contain standard business terms and conditions, there are some transactions that contain non-standard business terms and conditions. As a result, significant contract interpretation is sometimes required to determine the appropriate accounting including: (1) whether an arrangement exists and what is included in the arrangement; (2) how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the deliverables if there are multiple deliverables; (3) when to recognize net revenues on the deliverables; (4) whether undelivered elements are essential to the functionality of delivered elements; and (5) whether we have fair value for the undelivered elements. In addition, our revenue recognition policy requires an assessment as to whether collection is probable, which inherently requires us to evaluate the creditworthiness of our customers. Changes in judgments on these assumptions and estimates could materially impact the timing of revenue recognition.
To a limited extent, we also enter into software development contracts with our customers that we recognize as net revenues on a completed contract basis. As a result, estimates of whether the contract is going to be profitable are necessary since we are required to record a provision for such loss in the period when the loss is first identified.
Inventory Valuation and Commitments
The valuation of inventories requires us to determine obsolete or excess inventory and inventory that is not of saleable quality. The determination of obsolete or excess inventories requires us to estimate the future demand for our products within specific time horizons, generally six months. If our demand forecast for specific products is greater than actual demand and we fail to reduce manufacturing output accordingly, we could be required to record additional inventory write-offs, which would have a negative impact on our gross profit percentage.
We review the adequacy of our inventory valuation on a quarterly basis. For production inventory, our methodology involves an assessment of the marketability of the product based on a combination of shipment history and future demand. We then evaluate the inventory found to be in excess and take appropriate write-downs to reflect the risk of obsolescence. This methodology is affected by our sales estimates. If actual demand were to be substantially lower than estimated, additional inventory write-downs for excess or obsolete inventories may be required.
We record accruals for estimated cancellation fees related to orders placed with our suppliers that have been cancelled or are expected to be cancelled. Consistent with industry practice, we acquire inventory through a combination of purchase orders, supplier contracts, and open orders based on projected demand information. These commitments typically cover our requirements for periods ranging from 1 to 5 months. If there is an abrupt and substantial decline in demand for one or more of our products or an unanticipated change in technological requirements for any of our products, we may be required to record additional accruals for cancellation fees that would negatively affect our results of operations in the period when the cancellation fees are identified and recorded.
We accrue for estimated warranty obligations when revenue is recognized based on an estimate of future warranty costs for delivered product. Our warranty obligation generally extends from one to three years from the date of shipment. We estimate such obligations based on the size of the installed base of products subject to warranty protection, historical and projected warranty claim rates, historical and projected costs associated with claims, and knowledge of specific product failures that are outside of our typical experience. Our estimates and judgments are affected by actual product failure rates and actual costs to repair. These estimates and judgments are more subjective for new product introductions as these estimates and judgments are based on similar products versus actual history.
General Revenue Reserve and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
General revenue reserve represents an estimate of future revenue adjustments related to current period net revenues based upon historical experience. Material revenue adjustments may result in changes to the amount and timing of our net revenues for any period. We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to pay their invoices to us in full. We regularly review the adequacy of our accounts receivable allowance after considering the size of the accounts receivable balance, each customers expected ability to pay, aging of accounts receivable balances, and our collection history with each customer. We make estimates and judgments about the inability of customers to pay the amounts they owe us which could change significantly if their financial condition changes or the economy in general deteriorates.
We performed our annual impairment test of goodwill as of August 1, 2009 and 2008 in accordance with ASC 350 (formerly SFAS No. 142) which did not result in an impairment of goodwill.
Subsequent to the annual impairment tests in fiscal year 2008, in light of our disappointing fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008 operating results due to severe macro-economic conditions caused by illiquidity of the credit markets, difficulties in the banking and financial sectors, falling consumer confidence and rising unemployment rates, we reduced our projected future cash flow significantly, which resulted in an indicator of possible impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets as defined under ASC 350 (formerly SFAS No. 142) and ASC 360 (formerly SFAS No. 144), requiring us to perform an impairment test as of October 15, 2008 (our fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008). During November 2008, the macroeconomic environment worldwide continued to weaken. This was caused by the illiquidity of the credit markets, difficulties in the banking and financial services sectors, falling consumer confidence and rising unemployment rates. Our stock price and market capitalization declined significantly which was considered an indicator of possible impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets triggering the necessity of an additional impairment test as of December 1, 2008 (our first fiscal quarter of fiscal year 2009).
When performing our impairment tests in fiscal year 2008 and 2009, we: (1) allocated goodwill to our various reporting units to which the acquired goodwill relates; (2) estimated the fair value of our reporting units; and (3) determined the carrying value (i.e. book value) of those reporting units, as some of the assets and liabilities related to those reporting units are not held by those reporting units but at the general corporate level.
During fiscal year 2008 and the first half of fiscal year 2009, we considered three generally accepted approaches to valuation in preparing our goodwill impairment assessment. These approaches are commonly referred to as the income approach, market approach and cost approach. Consistent with prior periods, we selected the income approach, and specifically the discounted cash flow (DCF) method, to derive the fair value of each of our reporting units. The DCF approach calculates fair value by estimating the after-tax cash flows to a present value using a risk-adjusted discount rate. We selected this method as being the most meaningful in conducting our goodwill assessments because we believe it most appropriately measures our income producing assets.
In applying the income approach to our accounting for goodwill, we made certain assumptions as to the amount and timing of future expected cash flows, terminal value growth rates and appropriate discount rates. The amount and timing of future cash flows within our DCF analysis is based on our most recent long-term forecasts of the expected future financial performance of each of the reporting units, including projections of revenues, costs of sales, operating expenses, income taxes, working capital requirements, and capital expenditures. The terminal value growth rate is used to calculate the value of cash flows beyond the last projected period in our DCF analysis and reflects our best estimates for stable, perpetual growth of our reporting units. We use weighted average cost of capital (WACC) as a basis for determining the discount rates to apply to our reporting units future expected cash flows.
Due to the weakening of the macroeconomic environment primarily driven by the illiquidity of the credit markets, difficulties in the banking and financial services sectors, falling consumer confidence, and rising unemployment rates, our stock price and market capitalization declined significantly. As a result, our estimated WACC increased from 19.4% for the goodwill impairment assessment in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008 to 29.0% for our interim impairment assessment as of December 1, 2008.
As a result of the impairment tests described above, we recorded impairment charges of $262.5 million for goodwill in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2008 for the EMEA reporting unit. During the first quarter of fiscal year 2009, we concluded that the carrying amount of the North America and Asia reporting units exceeded their implied fair values and recorded an estimated impairment charge of $178.2 million. We finalized the goodwill evaluation process and recorded a $2.7 million reduction of impairment charge during the second quarter of
fiscal year 2009. The final impairment charge was $175.5 million. The net carrying value of goodwill in North America and International segments was reduced by $65.6 million and $109.9 million, respectively. See Note 2. Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets for additional information.
The process of evaluating the potential impairment of goodwill is subjective and requires significant judgment at many points during the analysis. In estimating the fair value of a reporting unit for the purposes of our annual or periodic analyses, we make estimates and judgments about the future cash flows of that reporting unit. Although our cash flow forecasts are based on assumptions that are consistent with our plans and estimates we are using to manage the underlying businesses, there is a significant amount of judgment involved in determining the cash flows attributable to a reporting unit. In addition, we make certain judgments about allocating shared assets to the estimated balance sheets of our reporting units. We also consider our and our competitors market capitalization on the date we perform the analysis. Changes in judgment on these assumptions and estimates could result in a goodwill impairment charge. Furthermore, a sustained decline in our market capitalization, further weakening of the macroeconomic environment or failure to meet our internal forecasts could result in changes to our evaluation of goodwill impairment in the future.
We will continue to evaluate the carrying value of our remaining goodwill and intangible assets and if we determine in the future that there is a potential further impairment in any of our reporting units, we may be required to record additional charges to earnings which could adversely affect our financial results.
We consider quarterly whether indicators of impairment of long-lived assets and intangible assets are present. These indicators may include, but are not limited to, significant decreases in the market value of an asset and significant changes in the extent or manner in which an asset is used. If these or other indicators are present, we test for recoverability of the asset by determining whether the estimated undiscounted cash flows attributable to the assets in question are less than their carrying value. If less, we recognize an impairment loss based on the excess of the carrying amount of the assets over their respective fair values. Fair value is determined by discounted future cash flows, appraisals or other methods.
As a result of our impairment analysis in October 2008, we recorded an impairment charge of $26.6 million in the Corporate segment related to the write-down to fair value of the net carrying value of certain developed and core technology intangible assets in the International segment.
When determining the fair value of developed and core technology intangibles, we estimate the future cash flows expected to be generated through the sale of products developed from the technologies. The cash flows include our estimates of related direct costs including cost of sales and allocable selling, general and administrative, and research and development costs. The sum of the estimated scheduled cash flows calculated on an undiscounted, pretax basis, is then compared to the carrying value to test the assets for recoverability. In instances where the sum of the scheduled cash flows is lower than the recorded value, an indicator of impairment exists. We then estimate the fair value by discounting the after tax cash flows using an estimated discount rate derived from our estimated WACC, adjusted for specific risks attributed to the asset. The result is then compared to the carrying value of the asset to determine the impairment, if any.
The new carrying value of the related asset is depreciated or amortized over the remaining estimated useful life of the asset. We also must make subjective judgments regarding the remaining useful life of the asset.
Contingencies and Litigation
We evaluate contingent liabilities including threatened or pending litigation in accordance with ASC 450 (formerly SFAS No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies). We assess the likelihood of any adverse judgments or outcomes to a potential claim or legal proceeding, as well as potential ranges of probable losses, when the outcomes of the claims or proceedings are probable and reasonably estimable. A determination of the amount of
accrued liabilities required, if any, for these contingencies is made after the analysis of each matter. Because of uncertainties related to these matters, we base our estimates on the information available at the time. As additional information becomes available, we reassess the potential liability related to pending claims and litigation and may revise our estimates. Any revisions in the estimates of potential liabilities could have a material impact on our results of operations and financial position.
We account for stock-based employee compensation plans under the fair value recognition and measurement provisions of ASC 718 (formerly SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment), and recognize compensation over the requisite service period for awards expected to vest. The estimation of stock awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results differ from our estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. In valuing share-based awards, significant judgment is required in determining the expected volatility of our common stock and the expected term individuals will hold their share-based awards prior to exercising. Expected volatility of the stock is based on a blend of our peer group in the industry in which we do business and the historical volatility of our own stock. The expected term of options granted is derived from the historical actual term of option grants and an estimate of future exercises during the remaining contractual period of the option. In the future, our expected volatility and expected term may change which could substantially change the grant-date fair value of future awards of stock options and ultimately the expense we record.
We are required to allocate the purchase price of acquired companies to the tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed, as well as IPR&D, based on their estimated fair values. Such valuations require management to make significant estimates and assumptions, especially with respect to intangible assets. The significant purchased intangible assets recorded by us include customer relationship, developed and core technology and trade names.
Critical estimates in valuing intangible assets include but are not limited to: future expected cash flows from customer contracts, customer lists, distribution agreements and acquired developed technologies and patents; expected costs to develop IPR&D into commercially viable products and estimating cash flows from projects when completed; brand awareness and market position, as well as assumptions about the period of time the brand will continue to be used in our product portfolio; and discount rates. Managements estimates of fair value are based upon assumptions believed to be reasonable, but which are inherently uncertain and unpredictable and, as a result, actual results may differ from estimates.
We monitor and regularly evaluate our organizational structure and associated operating expenses. Depending on events and circumstances, we may decide to take actions to reduce future operating costs as our business requirements evolve. In determining restructuring charges, we analyze our future operating requirements, including the required headcount by business functions and facility space requirements. Our restructuring costs, and any resulting accruals, involve significant estimates using the best information available at the time the estimates are made. These restructuring costs are accounted for under ASC 420 (formerly SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities) or under ASC 712 (formerly SFAS No. 112, Employers Accounting for Postemployment Benefits). In recording severance reserves, we accrue a liability when all of the following conditions have been met: management, having the authority to approve the action, commits to a plan of termination; the plan identifies the number of employees to be terminated, their job classifications and their locations, and the expected completion date; the plan is communicated such that the terms of the benefit arrangement are explained in sufficient detail to enable employees to determine the type and amount of benefits they will receive if they are involuntarily terminated; and actions required to complete the
plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn. In recording facilities lease loss reserves, we make various assumptions, including the time period over which the facilities are expected to be vacant, expected sublease terms, expected sublease rates, anticipated future operating expenses, and expected future use of the facilities. Our estimates involve a number of risks and uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control, including future real estate market conditions and our ability to successfully enter into subleases or lease termination agreements with terms as favorable as those assumed when arriving at our estimates. We regularly evaluate a number of factors to determine the appropriateness and reasonableness of our restructuring and lease loss accruals including the various assumptions noted above. If actual results differ significantly from our estimates, we may be required to adjust our restructuring and lease loss accruals in the future.
We also incur costs from our plan to exit certain activities of companies acquired in business combinations. These costs are recognized as a liability on the date of the acquisition when both of the following conditions are met: management assesses, formulates, and approves a plan to exit the activity; and the exit plan identifies the activities to be disposed, the locations of those activities, the method of disposition, all significant actions needed to complete the plan, and the expected date of completion of the plan.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the expected tax consequences of temporary differences between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts using enacted tax rates in effect for the year the differences are expected to reverse. In evaluating our ability to recover our deferred tax assets we consider all available positive and negative evidence including our past operating results, the existence of cumulative losses in past fiscal years and our forecast of future taxable income in the jurisdictions in which we have operations.
We have placed a valuation allowance on all net U.S. deferred tax assets and certain non-U.S. deferred tax assets because realization of these tax benefits through future taxable income cannot be reasonably assured. We intend to maintain the valuation allowances until sufficient positive evidence exists to support the reversal of the valuation allowances. An increase in the valuation allowance would result in additional tax expense in such period. We make estimates and judgments about our future taxable income that are based on assumptions that are consistent with our plans and estimates. Should the actual amounts differ from our estimates, the amount of our valuation allowance could be materially impacted.
We must make certain estimates and judgments in determining income tax expense for financial statement purposes. These estimates and judgments occur in the calculation of tax credits and deductions, and in the calculation of certain tax assets and liabilities, which arise from differences in the timing of recognition of revenue and expense for tax and financial statement purposes, as well as the interest and penalties relating to these uncertain tax positions. Significant changes to these estimates may result in an increase or decrease to our tax provision in a subsequent period.
The calculation of our tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws. Our estimate for the potential outcome of any uncertain tax issue is based on detailed facts and circumstances of each issue. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner inconsistent with our expectations could have a material impact on our results of operations and financial condition.
We adopted ASC 740 (formerly FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Income Tax Uncertainties) in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008. ASC 740 defines the threshold for recognizing the benefits of tax return positions in the financial statements as more-likely-than-not to be sustained by the taxing authority. The recently issued literature also provides guidance on the derecognition, measurement and classification of income tax uncertainties, along with any related interest and penalties. This standard also includes guidance concerning accounting for income tax uncertainties in interim periods and increases the level of disclosures associated with
any recorded income tax uncertainties. See Note 8. Income Taxes in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of this 2009 Form 10-K for further discussion.
As a result of the implementation of ASC 740, 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 on audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step requires us to estimate and measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement. It is inherently difficult and subjective to estimate such amounts, as this requires us to determine the probability of various possible outcomes. We re-evaluate 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. Such a change in recognition or measurement would result in the recognition of a tax benefit or an additional charge to the tax provision in the period.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Information with respect to our recent accounting pronouncements may be found in Note 1. Principles of Consolidation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which section is incorporated herein by reference.
Recently Adopted Accounting Standards
Information with respect to our recently adopted accounting standards may be found in Note 1. Principles of Consolidation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which section is incorporated herein by reference.
Selected Quarterly Results of Operations
The following selected quarterly data should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes and Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This information has been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements that, in our opinion, reflect all recurring adjustments necessary to fairly present our financial information when read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes. The results of operations for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for any future period.
Quarterly Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited)
The table below sets forth selected unaudited financial data for each quarter for the last two fiscal years (in thousands, except for per share amounts):
We are exposed to market risk related to changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates. To mitigate some of these risks, we utilize derivative financial instruments to hedge these exposures. We do not use derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes. We do not anticipate any material changes in our primary market risk exposures in fiscal year 2010.
Interest Rate Risk
We are exposed to interest rate risk related to our borrowings under the credit agreement we entered into on October 31, 2006. These borrowings generally bear interest based upon the one or three-month LIBOR rate. As of October 31, 2009, a 50 basis point increase in interest rates on our borrowings subject to variable interest rate fluctuations would increase our interest expense by approximately $1.1 million annually. We generally invest most of our cash in overnight and short-term instruments, which would earn more interest income if market interest rates rise and less interest income if market interest rates fall.
Foreign Currency Transaction Risk
A majority of our sales are made to customers outside the United States. A substantial portion of the net revenues we generate from such sales is denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Additionally, portions of our cost of net revenues and other operating expenses are incurred by our international operations and are denominated in local currencies. For consolidated reporting, revenue and expenses denominated in non-US currencies are translated to US dollars at average currency exchange rates for the period (P&L Exposures). Thus, even if foreign currency results were stable, fluctuating currency rates produce volatile reported results. We have made limited efforts to mitigate P&L Exposures by hedging with currency derivatives. As of October 31, 2009, we had one foreign exchange forward contract in place to hedge, in effect, the gross margin of a significant sales agreement in Brazil. The contract, designated as a Cash Flow Hedge pursuant to ASC 815 (formerly SFAS No. 133), had a remaining balance of $1.9 million at October 31, 2009.
We may in the future use foreign exchange forward or option contracts to hedge P&L Exposures, depending upon the risks of the exposures, the costs of hedging, and other considerations. However, hedges of P&L Exposures will only mitigate a portion of our risk and only for a short period. We will remain subject to the currency risk of P&L Exposures.
The balance sheets of our U.S. and international businesses have monetary assets and liabilities denominated in currencies other than the primary currency of such business (Balance Sheet Exposures), such as Canadian dollar receivables held by our U.S. business, or U.S. dollar payables of our Spanish business. As exchange rates fluctuate, Balance Sheet Exposures generate foreign currency transaction gains and losses, which are included in other income (expense), net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
We have in the past run a hedging program to mitigate the risk of Balance Sheet Exposures by entering into foreign exchange forward contracts. The objective is to have gains or losses of the foreign exchange forward contracts largely offset the losses or gains of the Balance Sheet Exposures. Foreign exchange forward contracts are included in Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets and Other Current Liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The contracts are marked-to-market on a monthly basis with gains and losses included in other income (expense), net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. In some instances, we seek to hedge transactions that are expected to become Balance Sheet Exposures in the very short-term, generally within one month. We do not use foreign exchange forward contracts for speculative or trading purposes.
Our outstanding foreign exchange forward contracts as of October 31, 2009 are presented in the table below. All forward contracts are representative of the expected payments to be made under these instruments. The fair market value of the contracts represents the difference between the spot currency rate at October 31, 2009 and the contracted rate. All of these forward contracts mature within 35 days of October 31, 2009 (in thousands):
As of October 31, 2009, our Balance Sheet Exposures amounted to $79.6 million and were partially offset by forward contracts with a notional amount of $64.7 million. Based on our net exposures as of October 31, 2009, a 10% movement of currency rate would result in a gain or loss of $1.5 million.
Hedging of our Balance Sheet Exposures may not always be effective to protect us against currency exchange rate fluctuations, particularly in the event of imprecise forecasts of non-U.S. denominated assets and liabilities. In addition, at times we have not fully hedged our Balance Sheet Exposures, leaving us at risk to foreign exchange gains and losses on the un-hedged amounts. Furthermore, historically we have not hedged our P&L Exposures. Accordingly, if there were an adverse movement in exchange rates, we might suffer significant losses. For instance, for the years ended October 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recorded $2.0 million, $11.3 million and $2.3 million in net foreign exchange losses, respectively, despite our hedging activities.
Equity Price Risk
In June 2007, we sold $316.2 million aggregate principal amount of 1.375% Senior Convertible Notes due 2012 (the Notes) which may be converted prior to maturity into cash and shares of our common stock upon the occurrence of certain events. In April 2009, we repurchased and extinguished $33.5 million par value of our outstanding Notes. As of October 31, 2009, the remaining par value of the Notes was $282.7 million. The conversion price of the Notes at issuance was approximately $44.02 per share. Upon conversion, we would pay the holder the cash value of the applicable number of shares of our common stock, up to the principal amount of the Notes. Amounts in excess of the principal amount, if any, would be paid in our common stock. Concurrently with the issuance of the Notes, we entered into note hedge transactions to reduce the financial impact from the conversion of the Notes and to mitigate any negative effect such conversion may have on the price of our common stock. We entered into the note hedge transactions with Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives (Lehman Derivatives) and JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association, London Branch whereby we purchased options to purchase approximately 7.2 million shares of our common stock at a price of $44.02 per share and sold warrants to the same counterparties whereby they have the option to purchase 7.2 million shares of our common stock at a price of approximately $62.36.
The filing by Lehman Brothers of a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in September 2008 constituted an event of default under the note hedge transactions with Lehman Derivatives. On September 21, 2008, we delivered a notice of termination to Lehman Derivatives to cancel 3.6 million options we purchased.
As of October 31, 2009, following the termination of the note hedge transaction with Lehman Derivatives as described above, we held an option to purchase up to 3.6 million shares of our common stock at $44.02, and have outstanding warrants for 7.2 million shares of our common stock at $62.36. Therefore, there is no impact if the share price of our common stock is below $44.02. For every $1 increase in the share price of our common stock from $44.02 up to $62.36, we expect to issue the equivalent of $3.6 million in shares of our common stock (at the relevant share price). For every $1 increase in the share price of our common stock above $62.36, we will be required to issue the equivalent of $7.2 million in shares of our common stock.
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of VeriFone Holdings, Inc., and subsidiaries as of October 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity and comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended October 31, 2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our 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 audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of VeriFone Holdings, Inc., and subsidiaries at October 31, 2009 and 2008, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended October 31, 2009, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
VeriFone Holdings, Inc. changed its method of accounting for uncertain tax positions as of November 1, 2007.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated December 22, 2009 expressed an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.
Palo Alto, California
December 22, 2009
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
VeriFone Holdings, Inc.
We have audited VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). VeriFone Holdings, Inc.s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Companys internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys 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 companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) 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 (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the companys 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.
A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the companys annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In its assessment management has identified a material weakness in the identification, documentation and review of various income tax calculations, reconciliations and related supporting documentation. This material weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of audit tests applied in our audit of the 2009 financial statements, and this report does not affect our report dated December 22, 2009 on those financial statements.
In our opinion, because of the effect of the material weakness described above on the achievement of the objectives of the control criteria, VeriFone Holdings, Inc. has not maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of October 31, 2009, based on the COSO criteria.
Palo Alto, California
December 22, 2009
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)