|
Previous: SPORTSMANS GUIDE INC, 10-Q, EX-27, 2000-08-16 |
Next: CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP /DE/, 10-Q, EX-27.1, 2000-08-16 |
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington, D.C. 20549FORM 10-Q|X| QUARTERLY REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE For the quarterly period ended July 2, 2000 OR |_| TRANSITION REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE Commission file number 1-10079 CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) |
Delaware (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
94-2885898 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
3901 North First
Street, San Jose, California 95134-1599 Registrants telephone number, including area code: (408) 943-2600 Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes |X| No |_| The total number of shares of the registrants common stock outstanding as of July 30, 2000, was 120,609,000. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATIONCONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
July 2, 2000 |
January 2, 2000 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASSETS | |||||
Current assets: | |||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $578,669 | $159,088 | |||
Short-term investments | 261,709 | 121,859 | |||
Total cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments | 840,378 | 280,947 | |||
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $3,924 at July 2, 2000 | |||||
and $3,471 at January 2, 2000 | 163,979 | 104,143 | |||
Inventories, net | 101,649 | 98,786 | |||
Other current assets | 85,583 | 78,117 | |||
Total current assets | 1,191,589 | 561,993 | |||
Property, plant and equipment, net | 450,706 | 358,206 | |||
Long-term investments | 197,675 | 111,324 | |||
Restricted investments | 60,945 | 61,198 | |||
Other assets | 72,362 | 54,237 | |||
Total assets | $1,973,277 | $1,146,958 | |||
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATIONCONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
July 2, 2000 |
January 2, 2000 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY | |||||
Current liabilities: | |||||
Accounts payable | $113,925 | $103,691 | |||
Accrued liabilities | 76,138 | 56,291 | |||
Deferred income on sales to distributors | 34,250 | 21,061 | |||
Income taxes payable | 53,199 | 20,311 | |||
Total current liabilities | 277,512 | 201,354 | |||
Convertible subordinated notes | 730,500 | 160,000 | |||
Deferred income tax | 57,932 | 56,100 | |||
Other long-term liabilities | 9,934 | 10,884 | |||
Total liabilities | 1,075,878 | 428,338 | |||
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 14) | |||||
Stockholders equity: | |||||
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 5,000 shares authorized; | |||||
none issued and outstanding | | | |||
Common stock, $0.01 par value, 650,000 and 250,000 shares authorized; | |||||
124,325 and 119,091 issued; 119,345 and 114,111 outstanding | |||||
at July 2, 2000 and January 2, 2000 | 1,243 | 1,162 | |||
Additional paid-in capital | 616,149 | 560,771 | |||
Notes receivable from stockholders | (2,535 | ) | (8,186 | ) | |
Retained earnings | 355,266 | 237,597 | |||
970,123 | 791,344 | ||||
Less shares of common stock held in treasury at cost: | |||||
4,980 shares at July 2, 2000 and January 2, 2000 | (72,724 | ) | (72,724 | ) | |
Total stockholders equity | 897,399 | 718,620 | |||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity | $1,973,277 | $1,146,958 | |||
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATIONCONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
Three Months Ended | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||
Revenues | $300,834 | $170,825 | |||
Costs and expenses: | |||||
Cost of revenues | 135,143 | 95,671 | |||
Research and development | 42,742 | 34,067 | |||
Selling, general and administrative | 36,513 | 26,850 | |||
Acquisition and merger costs | 7,592 | 6,070 | |||
Restructuring credits | (485 | ) | (100 | ) | |
Total operating costs and expenses | 221,505 | 162,558 | |||
Operating income | 79,329 | 8,267 | |||
Interest expense | (5,501 | ) | (2,465 | ) | |
Interest income and other | 12,315 | 3,871 | |||
Income before income taxes | 86,143 | 9,673 | |||
Provision for income taxes | 20,514 | 1,210 | |||
Net income | $65,629 | $8,463 | |||
Net income per share: | |||||
Basic | $0.56 | $0.08 | |||
Diluted | $0.49 | $0.08 | |||
Shares used in per share calculations: | |||||
Basic | 118,186 | 107,484 | |||
Diluted | 142,117 | 112,838 |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATIONCONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
Six Months Ended | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||
Revenues: | $565,075 | $330,118 | |||
Costs and expenses: | |||||
Cost of revenues | 265,969 | 188,969 | |||
Research and development | 81,135 | 66,241 | |||
Selling, general and administrative | 70,139 | 51,801 | |||
Acquisition and merger costs | 11,801 | 9,712 | |||
Restructuring credits | (485 | ) | (3,710 | ) | |
Total operating costs and expenses | 428,559 | 313,013 | |||
Operating income | 136,516 | 17,105 | |||
Interest expense | (10,067 | ) | (4,790 | ) | |
Interest income and other | 26,717 | 7,149 | |||
Income before income taxes | 153,166 | 19,464 | |||
Provision for income taxes | 35,497 | 2,196 | |||
Net income | $117,669 | $17,268 | |||
Net income per share: | |||||
Basic | $1.01 | $0.17 | |||
Diluted | $0.89 | $0.16 | |||
Shares used in per share calculations: | |||||
Basic | 117,014 | 104,097 | |||
Diluted | 140,433 | 108,718 |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATIONCONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
Six Months Ended | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||
Cash flow from operating activities: | |||||
Net income | $117,669 | $17,268 | |||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash | |||||
provided by operating activities: | |||||
Depreciation and amortization | 64,157 | 54,811 | |||
Gain on sale of FCT product line | (5,000 | ) | | ||
Acquired in-process research and development | 2,025 | 4,019 | |||
Other non-recurring costs | 1,964 | | |||
Restructuring credits | (485 | ) | (3,710 | ) | |
Loss on sales of property, plant and equipment | 355 | | |||
Amortization of debt issuance costs | 1,465 | 265 | |||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | |||||
Accounts receivable | (59,785 | ) | (18,090 | ) | |
Inventories | (4,017 | ) | (15,365 | ) | |
Other assets | (5,950 | ) | (3,489 | ) | |
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | 32,269 | 10,737 | |||
Deferred income | 13,189 | 4,551 | |||
Income taxes payable | 32,888 | 1,202 | |||
Net cash flow generated from operating activities | 190,744 | 52,199 | |||
Cash flow from investing activities: | |||||
Purchase of investments | (275,168 | ) | (112,689 | ) | |
Sale or maturities of investments | 48,967 | 23,321 | |||
Notes Receivable | | (3 | ) | ||
Acquisition of Anchor | | (14,956 | ) | ||
Acquisition of Arcus | | (9,883 | ) | ||
Acquisition of property, plant and equipment | (151,768 | ) | (41,499 | ) | |
Proceeds from sale of FCT product line | 7,500 | | |||
Proceeds from the sale of equipment | 320 | 7,679 | |||
Net cash flow used for investing activities | (370,149 | ) | (148,030 | ) | |
Cash flow from financing activities: | |||||
Issuance of convertible subordinated notes, net of issuance costs | 554,812 | | |||
Issuance of common shares (1) | 39,558 | | |||
Re-issuance of treasury shares | | 57,985 | |||
Repayment of stockholders notes | 5,651 | | |||
Issuance of notes to employees | | (7,892 | ) | ||
Borrowing from (repayment of) notes payable and line of credit | (1,085 | ) | 499 | ||
Other long-term liabilities | 50 | (4,531 | ) | ||
Net cash flow generated by financing activities | 598,986 | 46,061 | |||
Net change in cash during the quarter ended March 31, 1999 for merger | | (2,339 | ) | ||
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents | 419,581 | (52,109 | ) | ||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year | 159,088 | 151,390 | |||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $578,669 | $99,281 | |||
Supplemental Disclosure of Non-Cash Flow Information | |||||
(1) Common stock issued for acquisition of RadioCom | 10,214 | |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements. |
(In thousands) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fair value of tangible net assets | $ 51 | ||||
In-process research and development | 2,025 | ||||
Current technology | 1,752 | ||||
Assembled workforce | 802 | ||||
Excess of purchase price over identifiable net | |||||
assets acquired | 5,584 | ||||
Total | $10,214 | ||||
The valuation method used to value the in-process technology of RadioCom is a form of discounted cash flow method commonly known as the percentage of completion approach whereby the cash flow derived from the technology is multiplied by the percentage of completion of the in-process technology. This approach is a widely recognized appraisal method and is commonly used to value technology assets. The value of the in-process technology of RadioCom is the discounted expected future cash flow attributable to the in-process technology, taking into consideration the percentage of completion of products utilizing this technology, utilization of pre-existing technology, the risks related to the characteristics and applications of the technology, existing and future markets, and the technological risk associated with completing the development of the technology. The cash flow derived from the in-process technology projects was discounted using a discount rate of 20.0%, which Cypress believes was appropriate for the risk of this technology for which commercial feasibility had not been established. The percentage of completion for each in-process project was determined by identifying milestones of completed project steps as compared to the remaining milestones to be completed to bring the project to technical and commercial feasibility. Milestones were based on managements estimate of tasks completed, value added and degree of difficulty of the portion of the project completed as of the acquisition date, in comparison with the tasks to be completed to bring the project to technical and commercial feasibility. |
Cypress |
Alation |
Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||
Total revenue | $264,241 | $ | $264,241 | ||||
Net income | $ 53,120 | $ (1,080 | ) | $ 52,040 |
Three months ended April 4, 1999:
Cypress |
Alation |
Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||
Total revenue | $159,124 | $ 169 | $159,293 | ||||
Net income | $ 9,275 | $ (470 | ) | $ 8,805 |
Six months ended July 4, 1999:
Cypress |
Alation |
Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||
Total revenue | $329,920 | $ 198 | $300,118 | ||||
Net income | $ 18,546 | $ (1,278 | ) | $ 17,268 |
Cypress |
Galvantech |
Total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(in thousands) | |||||||
Total revenue | $151,591 | $ 7,533 | $159,124 | ||||
Net income | $ 8,684 | $ 591 | $ 9,275 |
Cypress acquired Arcus for a total consideration of $17.7 million, including cash of $11.5 million and stock of $6.2 million, excluding direct acquisition costs of $0.8 million for legal and accounting fees. Through July 2, 2000, Cypress paid $9.9 million in cash and issued $6.2 million in stock. Cypress incurred a non-recurring charge of $2.0 million in the quarter ended July 2, 2000 due to an acceleration of contractual obligations. The remaining $1.6 million in cash will be paid as certain performance milestones are reached. The total purchase price was allocated to the estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on independent appraisals and management estimates as follows: |
(In thousands) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fair value of tangible net assets | $ 391 | ||||
In-process research and development | 2,500 | ||||
Current technology | 4,400 | ||||
Assembled workforce | 1,600 | ||||
Deferred compensation | 5,553 | ||||
Excess of purchase price over identifiable net | |||||
assets acquired | 3,264 | ||||
Total | $17,708 | ||||
Note 7 Acquisition of Anchor Chips, Inc.On May 25, 1999, Cypress acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Anchor Chips, Inc. (Anchor), a company that designs and markets microcontroller chips to support the Universal Serial Bus applications. The acquisition was accounted for using purchase accounting. Accordingly, the estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed were included in Cypresss condensed consolidated balance sheet as of and since May 25, 1999, the effective date of the purchase. The results of operations of Anchor were included in Cypresss consolidated results of operations as of and since the effective date of the purchase. Cypress paid approximately $15.0 million in cash, which excludes direct acquisition costs of $0.7 million for investment banking, legal and accounting fees. In addition Cypress assumed net liabilities of approximately $0.9 million. The total purchase consideration of $15.0 million was allocated to the estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on the valuation completed by management, using a valuation methodology commonly applied by independent appraisers, as follows: |
(In thousands) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fair value of tangible net assets | $ (919 | ) | |||
In-process research and development | 1,519 | ||||
Assembled workforce | 1,320 | ||||
Current technology | 13,036 | ||||
Total | $ 14,956 | ||||
During the quarter ended April 4, 1999, Cypress recorded merger-related transaction costs of $3.7 million related to the acquisition of ICW. These charges, which consist primarily of investment banking and other professional fees, have been included under acquisition and merger costs in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. Note 9 Cash and Investments |
July 2, 2000 |
January 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $578,669 | $159,088 | |||||
Short-term investments | 261,709 | 121,859 | |||||
Long-term investments | 197,675 | 111,324 | |||||
Restricted investments | 60,945 | 61,198 | |||||
Total | $1,098,998 | $453,469 | |||||
Note 10 Inventories |
July 2, 2000 |
January 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||
Raw materials | $ 10,479 | $13,360 | |||||
Work-in-process | 56,331 | 49,328 | |||||
Finished goods | 34,839 | 36,098 | |||||
Total | $101,649 | $98,786 | |||||
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Income |
Shares |
Per-Share Amount |
Income |
Shares |
Per-Share Amount | ||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | |||||||||||||||
Basic EPS: | |||||||||||||||
Net income | $65,629 | 118,186 | $0.56 | $8,463 | 107,484 | $0.08 | |||||||||
Effects of dilutive | |||||||||||||||
securities: | |||||||||||||||
6% Convertible Notes | 1,464 | 6,772 | | | |||||||||||
4% Convertible Notes | 1,726 | 6,119 | | | |||||||||||
3.75% Convertible Notes | 128 | 358 | | | |||||||||||
7.00% Convertible Notes | 2 | 15 | | 74 | |||||||||||
Stock options | | 10,667 | | 5,280 | |||||||||||
Diluted EPS: | |||||||||||||||
Net income | $68,949 | 142,117 | $0.49 | $8,463 | 112,838 | $0.08 | |||||||||
Six months ended July 2, 2000 and July 4, 1999: |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Income |
Shares |
Per-Share Amount |
Income |
Shares |
Per-Share Amount | ||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share amounts) | |||||||||||||||
Basic EPS: | |||||||||||||||
Net income | $117,66 | 9 | 117,014 | $1.01 | $17,268 | 104,097 | $0.17 | ||||||||
Effects of dilutive securi | s: | ||||||||||||||
6% Convertible Notes | 3,336 | 6,772 | | | |||||||||||
4% Convertible Notes | 3,375 | 5,380 | | | |||||||||||
3.75% Convertible Notes | 128 | 179 | | | |||||||||||
7.00% Convertible Notes | 5 | 31 | | 48 | |||||||||||
Stock options | | 11,057 | | 4,573 | |||||||||||
Diluted EPS: | |||||||||||||||
Net income | $124,51 | 3 | 140,433 | $0.89 | $17,268 | 108,718 | $0.16 | ||||||||
| The shutdown of Fab 3, located in Bloomington, Minnesota and consolidation of parts of Fab 3 operations with other operations of Cypress. |
| The discontinuance of the 0.6-micron 256K Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) production in Fab 2 located in Texas. |
| The conversion of an existing research and development fab located in San Jose (Fab 1) to eight-inch capability in order to be compatible with the state of the art eight-inch Minnesota manufacturing facility. |
| The transfer of Cypresss test operations from its subcontractor, Alphatec, in Thailand to Cypresss production facility in the Philippines. |
The restructuring activities described above included the termination of approximately 850 employees, primarily from manufacturing, both at Cypress and at Alphatec. During Q2 1998, in conjunction with the closure of Fab 3, Cypress established a reserve for $1.4 million to cover severance costs associated with the reduction of work force at that location. This was based on the anticipated level of payments that would be made to personnel included in the work force reduction. As a part of a review of inventory, it was noted that Cypress required an additional reserve of $0.5 million to cover inventory that was written off. This related to a change in estimate regarding inventory that had been previously reserved. The following tables set forth charges taken against the restructuring reserve during the six-months ended July 2, 2000 and Cypresss 1998 restructuring expense and charges taken against the reserve from the date the restructuring commenced through July 2, 2000, respectively. |
Balance January 2, 2000 |
Utilized |
Credits |
Balance July 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Other fixed asset related charges(1) | $1,807 | $(159 | ) | $ | $1,648 |
1998 Restructuring Expense |
Utilized |
Credits |
Balance July 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Write-down of inventory (1) | $3,250 | $(3,250 | ) | $ | $ | ||||
Severance and other employee related charges(1) (2) | 5,334 | (2,234 | ) | (3,100 | ) | $ | |||
Other fixed asset related charges(1) | 3,030 | (862 | ) | (520 | ) | 1,648 | |||
Provision for phase-down and consolidation of | |||||||||
manufacturing facilities(1) | 976 | (637 | ) | (339 | ) | | |||
Total | $12,590 | $(6,983 | ) | $(3,959 | ) | $1,648 | |||
(1) | Classified on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as part of accrued liabilities. |
(2) | The amount utilized represents cash payments related to severance of approximately 850 employees. |
During the quarter ended April 4, 1999, Cypress reversed $3.7 million of previously provided restructuring costs, $2.2 million of severance and other employee related charges and $0.3 million for the provision for phase-down and consolidation of manufacturing facilities were reversed in conjunction with the completion of the Alphatec restructuring activities. $0.5 million was reversed for other fixed asset related charges based on the determination that a portion of the fixed asset removal costs accrual would not be required. These reversals related to Cypresss 1998 restructuring activities. Cypress also reversed a $0.7 million reserve for fixed asset installation costs related to its 1996 restructuring activities which was no longer required. Restructuring activities associated with Fabs 2 and 3 were completed in May and July 1998, respectively, consistent with Cypresss restructuring schedule except for the disposal of equipment. $0.9 million of severance and other employee related charges were reversed at that time. Fab 1 restructuring was not completed in January 1999 as originally planned. Cypress is in the process of converting its R&D wafer facility in San Jose to eight-inch capability and expects to have the conversion completed by December 2000. The Alphatec consolidation and transfer activity was completed in January 1999, one month later than originally planned. 1997 Restructuring Costs During the fourth quarter of 1997, Cypress (ICW) made a decision to shut down its wafer fab located in San Jose. In connection with the shut down of the wafer fab, Cypress (ICW) recorded a restructuring charge of $9.9 million related to the impairment of assets ($3.9 million), non-cancelable operating lease commitments ($3.6 million), costs associated with a reduction in work force ($0.2 million) and other transaction costs ($2.2 million). The other transaction costs related primarily to inventory write-offs, expenses incurred to remove and return leased equipment and brokerage and professional fees. The following tables set forth charges taken against the reserve during the six-month period ended July 2, 2000 and Cypresss 1997 restructuring expense and charges taken against the reserve from the date the restructuring commenced through July 2, 2000 respectively. The actual liquidation of substantially all of the impaired assets was completed in November 1998. The balance of the reserve remaining was reversed and taken as a restructuring credit in Q2 2000 when it was determined that no outstanding commitments existed. |
Balance January 2, 2000 |
Utilized |
Credits |
Balance July 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Operating lease costs(1) | $506 | $(21 | ) | $(485 | ) | $ | |||
1997 Restructuring Expense |
Utilized |
Credits |
Balance July 2, 2000 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Operating lease costs(1) | $3,615 | $(3,130 | ) | $(485 | ) | $ | |||
Severance and other employee related charges(1) | 207 | (207 | ) | | | ||||
Transaction and other costs(1) | 2,164 | (2,164 | ) | | | ||||
Total | $5,986 | $(5,501 | ) | $(485 | ) | $ | |||
(1) | Classified on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as part of accrued liabilities. |
| Enforce its patents or other intellectual property rights. |
| Protect its trade secrets and know-how. |
| Determine the validity or scope of the proprietary rights of others. |
| Defend against claims of infringement or invalidity. |
Such litigation has in the past and could in the future result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources. Such litigation could also result in payment of substantial damages and/or royalties or prohibitions against utilization of essential technologies, and could have a material adverse effect on Cypresss business, financial condition and results of operations. On June 12, 2000, Cypress filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, against Altera Corporation for tortious interference with existing contractual relations, tortious interference with prospective economic relations, misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition. The complaint arises from Alteras interference with a multi-year agreement to collaborate on research and development between Cypress and Right Track CAD Corporation. Cypress believes that it will ultimately prevail in this matter. While no assurance can be given regarding the outcome of this action, Cypress believes that the final outcome of the matter will not have a material effect on Cypresss consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, should the outcome of this action be unfavorable, Cypress may be required to pay legal fees and other expenses, which is not expected to have a material adverse effect on Cypresss financial position and results of operations. |
During 1998, EMI Group of North America, Inc. (EMI) filed suit against Cypress in the Federal Court in Delaware, claiming that Cypress infringed on four patents owned by EMI. Cypress and EMI entered into a license agreement in February 1999, for one of the four patents in the lawsuit. EMI withdrew two of the four patents from the lawsuit, including the patent related to the licensing agreement. The case involving the two remaining patents went to trial in October 1999. The jury ruled in favor of Cypress claiming that none of the patents were infringed by Cypress and that each asserted claim was invalid due to prior art and physical impossibility (i.e. the patents require a step that is physically impossible to perform). On July 7, 2000, the court ruled on post-trial motions filed by EMI, upholding the jurys findings that the EMI patents are invalid and that Cypress does not infringe the EMI patents. EMI may appeal these rulings. Should EMI appeal the decision of the Federal Court, Cypress intends to defend itself vigorously. However, should the outcome of this action be unfavorable, Cypresss business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. In January 1998, an attorney representing the estate of Mr. Jerome Lemelson contacted Cypress and charged that Cypress infringed certain patents owned by Mr. Lemelson. On February 26, 1999, the Lemelson attorneys sued Cypress and 87 other companies for infringement of 16 patents. Cypress has reviewed and investigated the allegations in the complaint and Cypress believes that the suits are without merit. Cypress will vigorously defend itself in this matter. While no assurance can be given regarding the outcome of this action, Cypress believes that the final outcome of the matter will not have a material effect on Cypresss consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, because of the nature and inherent uncertainties of litigation, should the outcome of this action be unfavorable, Cypress may be required to pay damages and other expenses, which could have a material adverse effect on Cypresss financial position and results of operations. In June 1997, Cypress commenced a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada against the Li Second Family Trust (the Trust). In this action, Cypress asked for declaratory relief to the effect that an U.S. patent relating to a part of the process for manufacturing semiconductors is unenforceable, invalid and not infringed by Cypress. The Trust has counter-claimed for patent infringement on the same patent, alleging such patent covers oxide-isolated integrated circuits. In May 1999, in a related case, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that the patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct by Dr. Li and his attorneys in obtaining the patent. Cypress believes it has meritorious defenses to the counter-claim and intends to defend itself vigorously. While no assurance can be given regarding the outcome of this action, Cypress believes that the final outcome of the matters will not have a material effect on Cypresss consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, should the outcome of this action be unfavorable, Cypresss business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. On October 2, 1997, Cypress filed an action against Kevin Yourman, Joseph Weiss, and their associated law offices in the Superior Court of California (Superior Court) in Santa Clara County for malicious civil prosecution in the underlying securities fraud actions initiated by Messrs. Yourman and Weiss in 1992. The underlying securities fraud actions were dismissed because no officer of Cypress made any actionable false or misleading statements or omissions. An appeal affirmed the lower courts finding that Messrs. Yourman and Weiss failed to put forth evidence showing a genuine issue of fact with regard to any statements by Cypresss officers. On May 4 1999, the Superior Court granted a summary judgment motion by Messrs. Yourman and Weiss, holding that Messrs. Yourman and Weiss had probable cause to bring the underlying litigation. Cypress is appealing the decision. However, the results of litigation are unpredictable. Cypress believes that this action, regardless of its outcome, will have little, if any effect on Cypresss consolidated financial position or results of operations. |
Three Months Ended |
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Memory | $141,331 | $71,890 | $263,997 | $137,676 | |||||
Non-memory | 159,503 | 98,935 | 301,078 | 192,442 | |||||
Total consolidated revenues | $300,834 | $170,825 | $565,075 | $330,118 | |||||
Business Segment Profit (Loss) |
Three Months Ended |
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Memory | $36,727 | $(7,715 | ) | $55,369 | $(19,616 | ) | |||
Non-memory | 49,709 | 21,952 | 92,463 | 42,723 | |||||
Acquisition and merger costs | (7,592 | ) | (6,070 | ) | (11,801 | ) | (6,102 | ) | |
Restructuring credits | 485 | 100 | 485 | 100 | |||||
Interest income and other | 12,315 | 3,871 | 26,717 | 7,149 | |||||
Interest expense | (5,501 | ) | (2,465 | ) | (10,067 | ) | (4,790 | ) | |
Income before provision for | |||||||||
income taxes | $86,143 | $9,673 | $153,166 | $19,464 | |||||
Three Months Ended |
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Memory | $141,332 | $71,928 | $263,992 | $137,714 | |||||
Non-memory | 159,502 | 98,897 | 301,083 | 192,404 | |||||
Total consolidated revenues | $300,834 | $170,825 | $565,075 | $330,118 | |||||
Sales from Memory Products include Static Random Access Memories (SRAMs) and multichip modules. Revenues from the sale of Memory Products for Q2 2000 increased $69.4 million or 96.6% over revenues from the sale of these products for Q2 1999. When comparing revenues for the six months ended July 2, 2000 to the comparable period of the prior fiscal year, Memory Product revenues increased $126.3 million or 91.7%. The increases in Memory Product revenues as compared to the three- and six-month periods ended July 4, 1999 resulted from both higher average selling prices (ASPs) and an increase in unit sales. ASPs increased 42% and unit sales increased 55% comparing Q2 2000 to Q2 1999. ASPs increased 37% and unit sales increased 58% comparing the six-month periods ended July 4, 1999 and July 2, 2000. Revenue growth for memory products can be attributed to strong demand in the communications markets. Sales of new products, such as the 1, 2, and 4 Mbit MoBL (More Battery Life) SRAMs, have resulted in higher unit sales and higher ASPs. Non-memory Products include computer products, interface products, data communication devices, non-volatile memory devices and programmable products. Non-memory Products also include foundry revenues. Foundry revenues represent the sale of wafers to customers. Revenues from the sale of Non-memory Products increased $60.6 million or 61.2% comparing Q2 2000 to Q2 1999. The growth related primarily to increases in sales of data communication devices of $32.1 million, interface products of $15.3 million, programmable products of $7.8 million, and timing technology products of $7.5 million. These increases were partially offset by decreases in foundry revenue of $0.5 million and non-volatile memory of $1.6 million. The primary factors contributing to the increase in data communication devices was higher unit sales and higher ASPs, particularly in the specialty memory and channel line of products. For the six-month period July 2, 2000 as compared to the same period in the previous fiscal year, revenues from the sale of Non-memory Products increased $108.7 or 56.5%. The increase from the six-month period ended July 4, 1999 to the comparable period in fiscal 2000 related primarily to increases in sales of data communication devices of $55.5 million, interface products of $31.5 million, programmable products of $14.7 million, and timing technology products of $12.2 million. These increases were partially offset by decreases in foundry revenue of $2.5 million and non-volatile memory of $2.8 million. The primary factors contributing to the increase in data communication devices was higher unit sales and higher ASPs, particularly in the specialty memory and channel line of products. The increase in revenues for interface products can be attributed to higher unit sales due to the growing market conversion to Universal Serial Bus (USB) peripheral products. The net increase in programmable logic devices was a result of higher unit sales and higher ASPs. The revenue growth in timing technology products between the first six-months of fiscal 1999 and 2000 was primarily a result of the increased unit sales due to greater acceptance of Cypresss clock products. |
The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical and subject to significant downturns as a result of a variety of risk factors, including, but not limited to, diminished product demand, production over-capacity and accelerated erosion of ASPs. Revenues have continued to be impacted by fluctuations in ASPs. Should ASPs erode at a rate greater than anticipated, gross margins could be seriously harmed. Cypress continues to introduce new products and new methods of reducing manufacturing costs in order to mitigate the effects of changes in ASPs on its gross margins. Cost of Revenues Cost as a percent of revenue decreased to 44.9% for Q2 2000 as compared to 56.0% in Q2 1999. For the six-month periods ended July 2, 2000 and July 4, 1999, cost as a percent of revenue was 47.1% and 57.2%, respectively. This improvement was brought about by a series of factors including increased value-added products which command higher prices and result in higher margin, strong unit demand, a stable pricing environment and continued cost reduction activities. Since 1998, Cypress has changed its product focus more towards solutions in the data-communications market. This change has resulted in new product offerings having a high value added component. This is in contrast to our prior focus of building larger and faster commodity memory devices. A prime example of this is our MoBL SRAM. The end result of Cypress new focus is that selling prices and the resulting margins are generally higher than in prior periods. The communications focus has also resulted in increased unit demand from our customers. Unit demand has further increased due to a strong semiconductor market characterized by tightness in supply even in older commodity products. This has enabled Cypress to enjoy improved factory utilization and absorption over 1999 and into 2000. The tight supply and the offering of more products that are not purely commodity driven has resulted in stable pricing in a business that usually endures price declines over a product-life cycle. Cypress has continued its significant investment in process technology, which has reduced the line widths, and resulting die size. Extensive use of Cypresss .25 micron technology has led to significant cost reductions particularly in the memory segment. While Cypress is optimistic about its abilities to continue the trend of improving margins, there are significant risk factors, described later in this report that could adversely impinge upon profit margins. In March 1998, Cypress announced restructuring activities for its domestic wafer fabrication facilities and offshore back-end manufacturing operations. Activities completed to date have increased Cypresss manufacturing efficiencies and decreased cost of revenues. Cost of revenues as a percent of revenues may be impacted by a variety of factors including but not limited to the following: |
| Product mix; |
| Factory capacity and utilization; |
| Manufacturing yields; |
| Availability of certain raw materials; |
| Terms negotiated with third-party contractors; and |
| Foreign currency fluctuations. |
These and other factors could cause a significant increase or decrease on our gross margin in future periods. Research &Development Research and development (R&D) expenditures for Q2 2000 were $42.7 million or 14.2% of revenues, compared to $34.1 million or 20.0% of revenues for Q2 1999. R&D costs incurred in the six months ended July 2, 2000 were $81.1 million or 14.4% or revenues compared to $66.2 million or 20.1% of revenues for the comparable period in fiscal 1999. Even though absolute spending in R&D was $8.6 million higher comparing Q2 2000 to Q2 1999, R&D expenditures as a percentage of revenues declined as the increase in revenues far exceeded the increase in spending. The $8.6 million increase in R&D costs from Q2 1999 to Q2 2000 relates primarily to costs associated with new product development at Cypresss design centers and to the continued development of more advanced process technologies. These factors also contributed to the $14.9 million increase in R&D expenditures from the first six months of fiscal 1999 to the first six months of fiscal 1999. |
Cypress expects spending for R&D will continue to increase as Cypress continues its efforts to accelerate the development of new products and migration to more advanced process technologies. Cypress is continuing to explore new markets and improve its design and process technologies in an effort to increase revenues and reduce costs. The foregoing statements regarding Cypresss R&D spending efforts are forward-looking. Selling, General and Administrative Selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses for Q2 2000 were $36.5 million or 12.1% of revenues, compared to $26.9 million or 15.7% of revenues for Q2 1999. SG&A costs incurred for the six months ended July 2, 2000 were $70.1 million or 12.4% of revenues compared to $51.8 million or 15.7% of revenues for the same period in 1999. Even though absolute spending in SG&A was $9.6 million higher comparing Q2 2000 to Q2 1999 and $18.3 million higher comparing the six months ended July 2, 2000 with the same period in 1999, SG&A expenditures as a percentage of revenues declined as the increase in revenues far exceeded the increase in spending. The increase in SG&A costs of $9.6 million from Q2 1999 to Q2 2000 and $18.3 million from the six month periods ended July 4, 1999 to July 2, 2000 relate primarily to higher commission expenses, salary and related benefit costs, legal fees, and expenses for other professional services. The change in all other SG&A expenses from 1999 to 2000 was not significant. With the exception of variable spending such as incentive bonuses and commissions, Cypress expects recurring SG&A spending to remain relatively constant. The foregoing statement regarding Cypresss SG&A spending efforts is forward-looking. Acquisition and Merger Costs During Q2 2000, Cypress recorded aggregate merger-related transaction costs of $7.6 million. The $7.6 million of costs incurred in Q2 2000 relate to the amortization of intangible assets recorded during the 1999 acquisitions of Anchor Chips, Arcus, and the MAX 5000 Programmable Logic Device (PLD) product line from Altera, and other acquisition costs related to the merger with Alation and the acquisition of RadioCom in Q2 2000. Acquisition costs of $3.6 million related to Alation and RadioCom and consist primarily of deferred compensation, legal, accounting and investment banking fees. During Q2 1999, Cypress recorded aggregate merger-related transaction costs of $6.1 million related primarily to the acquisition of Anchor Chips and Arcus. These charges consist primarily of investment banking and other professional fees. 1998 Restructuring Costs In March 1998, Cypress recorded a one-time, pre-tax restructuring charge of $57.1 million related to the impairment of assets ($46.4 million), reduction in work force ($4.8 million), and other transaction costs ($5.9 million). The restructuring entailed: |
| The shutdown of Fab 3 located in Bloomington, Minnesota and consolidation of parts of Fab 3 operations with other operations of Cypress. |
| The discontinuance of the 0.6-micron 256K SRAM production in Fab 2 located in Texas. |
| The conversion of an existing research and development fab located in San Jose (Fab 1) to eight-inch capability in order to be compatible with the state of the art eight-inch Minnesota manufacturing facility. |
| The transfer of Cypresss test operations from its subcontractor, Alphatec, in Thailand to Cypresss production facility in the Philippines. |
The restructuring activities described above included the termination of approximately 850 personnel, primarily from manufacturing, both at Cypress and at Alphatec. During Q2 1998, in conjunction with the closure of Fab 3, Cypress established a reserve for $1.4 million to cover severance costs associated with the reduction of work force at that location. This was based on the anticipated level of payments that would be made to personnel included in the work force reduction. As a part of a review of inventory, it was noted that Cypress required an additional reserve of $0.5 million to cover inventory that was written off. This related to a change in estimate regarding inventory that had been previously reserved. |
Restructuring activities associated with Fabs 2 and 3 were completed in May and July 1998, respectively, consistent with Cypresss restructuring schedule except for the disposal of equipment. Fab 1 restructuring was not completed in January 1999 as originally planned. Cypress is in the process of converting its R&D wafer facility in San Jose to eight-inch capability and expects to have the conversion completed by December 2000. The Alphatec consolidation and transfer activity was completed in January 1999, one month later than originally planned. 1999 Restructuring Credits During Q1 1999, Cypress reversed $3.7 million of previously provided restructuring costs. $2.2 million of severance and other employee related charges and $0.3 million for the provision for phase-down and consolidation of manufacturing facilities were reversed in conjunction with the completion of the Alphatec restructuring activities. $0.5 million for other fixed asset related charges was reversed based on the determination that a portion of the fixed asset removal costs accrual would not be required. These reversals related to Cypresss 1998 restructuring activities. Cypress also reversed a $0.7 million reserve for fixed asset installation costs related to its 1996 restructuring activities which was no longer required. Interest Expense Interest expense was $5.5 million and $10.1 million during the three and the six month periods ended July 2, 2000 respectively, compared to $2.5 million and $4.8 million for the three and the six month periods ended July 4, 1999. Interest expense is primarily associated with the 6.0% Convertible Subordinated Notes, issued in September 1997 and due in 2002, the 4.0% Convertible Subordinated Notes, issued in January 2000 and due in 2005, and the 3.75% Convertible Subordinated Notes, issued in June 2000 and due in 2005. The increase of $3.0 million for Q2 1999 relates primarily to the increase in interest due to the January 2000 issuance of the 4.0% Convertible Subordinated Notes. The $5.3 million increase from the six months ended July 4, 1999 relates primarily to the increase in interest due to the January 2000 issuance of the 4.0% Convertible Subordinated Notes. Interest Income and Other Net interest income and other was $12.3 million and $26.7 million for the three- and six-month periods ended July 2, 2000, respectively, compared to $3.9 million and $7.1 million for the three- and six-month periods ended July 4, 1999. Net interest income and other includes interest income, amortization of bond issuance costs, foreign exchange gains and losses and other non-recurring items. The $8.4 million increase from Q2 1999 to Q2 2000 relates primarily to higher interest income due to increased cash balances, primarily resulting from new convertible note issuances in January and June 2000, and higher investment yields. The $19.6 million increase from the first six months of fiscal 1999 to the first six months of fiscal 2000 relates primarily to higher interest income due to increased cash balances, primarily resulting from new convertible note issuances in January and June 2000, and higher investment yields. The six-month period ended July 2, 2000 also includes a $5.0 million non-recurring gain related to the sale of the FCT business. Taxes Cypresss effective tax rates for Q2 2000 and Q2 1999 were 23.8% and 12.5%, respectively, resulting in an income tax expense of $20.5 million and $1.2 million, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate from Q2 1999 to Q2 2000 can be attributed to non-deductible in-process research and development charges and merger costs. Cypresss effective tax rates for Q2 2000 and Q2 1999, excluding non-deductible in-process research and development charges and merger costs, were 22.0 % and 5.0 %, respectively. Cypresss effective rate varies from the U.S. statutory rate due to non-deductible in-process research and development charges and merger costs offset by utilization of loss carryovers, earnings of foreign subsidiaries taxed at lower rates and tax credits. During 1998, the United States Internal Revenue Service began an examination of tax returns for fiscal years 1994 through 1996. The examination concluded in June 2000. The outcome of the examination did not have a material effect on Cypresss consolidated financial position or results of operations. Net Income and Net Income Per Share Net income for Q2 2000 was $65.6 million or $0.49 per share on a diluted basis, compared to a net income of $8.5 million or $0.08 per share, on a diluted basis for Q2 1999. Net income for the six months ended July 2, 2000 was $117.7 million or $0.89 per share on a diluted basis, compared to net income of $17.3 million or $0.16 per share on a diluted basis for the six months ended July 4, 1999. |
Earnings Before Goodwill Cypress reported basic earnings before goodwill (EBG) and diluted EBG. EBG refers to earnings excluding pretax acquisition and restructuring related charges and credits, in-process research and development costs, transaction costs and amortization of intangible assets, net of tax. These charges and credits are excluded from the computation of EBG and are collectively referred to as goodwill by Cypress. We have presented EBG as a measure of our operating results, but EBG is not intended to replace operating income or net income as an indicator of operating performance, or to replace cash flow as a measure of liquidity, because EBG is not a concept under generally accepted accounting principles. Also, our calculation of EBG may not be comparable to EBG as calculated by other companies. The table below reconciles basic and diluted net income per share to basic and diluted earnings before goodwill per share, respectively. Reconciliation of basic net income per share to basic earnings before goodwill: |
Three Months Ended |
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Basic net income per share | $0.56 | $0.08 | $ 1.01 | $ 0.17 | |||||
Goodwill & Acquisition costs net of taxes per share . | $0.06 | $0.05 | $ 0.08 | $ 0.09 | |||||
Non-recurring gain on sale of FCT per share | $ | $ | $(0.03 | ) | $ | ||||
Restructuring credits net of taxes per share | $ | $ | $ | $(0.04 | ) | ||||
Basic earnings before goodwill per share | $0.62 | $0.13 | $ 1.06 | $ 0.22 | |||||
Reconciliation of diluted net income per share to diluted earnings before goodwill: |
Three Months Ended |
Six Months Ended | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 |
July 2, 2000 |
July 4, 1999 | ||||||
(In thousands) | |||||||||
Diluted net income per share | $0.49 | $0.08 | $ 0.89 | $ 0.16 | |||||
Goodwill & Acquisition costs net of taxes per share | $0.05 | $0.05 | $ 0.07 | $ 0.09 | |||||
Non-recurring gain on sale of FCT per share | $ | $ | $(0.03 | ) | $ | ||||
Restructuring credits net of taxes per share | $ | $ | $ | $(0.04 | ) | ||||
Diluted earnings before goodwill per share | $0.54 | $0.13 | $ 0.93 | $ 0.21 | |||||
Liquidity and Capital ResourcesCypresss cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments totaled $840.4 million at July 2, 2000, a $559.4 million increase from the end of fiscal 1999. During the three- and six-month periods ended July 2, 2000, Cypress purchased $87.6 million and $151.8 million in capital equipment, respectively, compared to $12.3 million and $41.5 million in the same periods in fiscal 1999. Cypress purchased equipment for its domestic wafer fabrication plants, its test and assembly facility in the Philippines and its design and technology groups. Equipment purchased for its fabs is expected to improve wafer manufacturing capacity and capabilities as Cypress implements new technologies, including its 0.16- and 0.25-micron processes. A majority of the equipment purchased was to increase the capacity and capability of Fab 4 located in Minnesota. Equipment purchased for the Philippines was used to increase manufacturing capacity and tool certain packaging capabilities. Purchases of capital equipment for the technology group are expected to enhance and accelerate research and development capabilities. Cypress continues its efforts to increase its manufacturing capabilities and capacity and to enhance its research and development capabilities. Capital expenditures for the remainder of 2000 are expected to be approximately $228.2 million. On January 31, 2000, Cypress filed a registration statement on Form S-3 with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Under this shelf registration, which was effective February 8, 2000, as amended by a post-effective amendment thereto effective March 7, 2000, Cypress can, through January 2002, sell any combination of debt securities, preferred stock and common stock in one or more offerings up to a total amount of $400.0 million. The shelf registration statement allows Cypress flexibility to raise funds from the offering of debt securities, common stock, preferred stock or a combination thereof, subject to market conditions and Cypresss capital needs. Pursuant to this shelf registration statement, on June 26, 2000, Cypress completed a $287.5 million register-placement of 5-year convertible subordinated notes. The notes are due in the year 2005, with a coupon rate 3.75% and an initial conversion premium of 27%. The notes are convertible into approximately 4.6 million shares of common stock and are callable by Cypress no earlier than July 5, 2003. Net proceeds were $279.6 million, after issuance costs of $7.9 million. |
| the intense competitive pricing pressure to which our products are subject, which can lead to rapid and unexpected declines in average selling prices; |
| the complexity of our manufacturing processes and the sensitivity of our production costs to declines in manufacturing yields, which make yield problems both possible and costly when they occur; and |
| the need for constant, rapid new product introductions which present an ongoing design and manufacturing challenge, which can be significantly impacted by even relatively minor errors, and which may result products never achieving expected market demand. |
As a result of these or other factors we could fail to achieve our expectations as to future revenues, gross profit and income from operations. Any downward fluctuation or failure to meet expectations will likely adversely affect the value of your investment in Cypress. In addition, because we recognize revenues from sales to our domestic distributors only when these distributors make a sale to customers, we are highly dependent on the accuracy of their resale estimates. The occurrence of inaccurate estimates also contributes to the difficulty in predicting our quarterly revenue and results of operations. We face periods of
industry-wide semiconductor over-supply which harm our results. Our financial results could
be seriously harmed if the markets in which we sell our products do not grow.
|
| data communications and telecommunications equipment; |
| computers and computer related peripherals; |
| automotive electronics; |
| industrial controls; |
| customer electronics equipment; and |
| military equipment. |
A significant portion of our products is incorporated into data communications and telecommunication end products. Any decline in the demand for networking applications, mass storage, telecommunications, cellular base stations, cellular handsets and other personal communication devices which incorporate our products could seriously harm our business, financial condition and operating results. In addition, certain of our products, including Universal Serial Bus microcontrollers, high-frequency clocks and static RAMs, are incorporated into computer and computer-related products, which have historically experienced significant fluctuations in demand. We may also be seriously harmed by slower growth in the other markets in which we sell our products. We are affected by a
general pattern of product price decline and fluctuations, which can harm our
business. |
In addition to following the general pattern of decreasing average selling prices, the selling prices for certain products, particularly commodity static RAM products, fluctuate significantly with real and perceived changes in the balance of supply and demand for these products. Growth in worldwide supply of static RAMs in recent periods resulted in a decrease in average selling prices for such products. If we are unable to decrease per unit manufacturing costs faster than a rate equal to or faster than the rate at which average selling prices continue to decline, our business, financial condition and results of operations will be seriously harmed. Furthermore, we expect our competitors to invest in new manufacturing capacity and achieve significant manufacturing yield improvements in the future. These developments could dramatically increase worldwide supply of static RAM products and result in associated downward pressure on prices. We may be unable to
adequately protect our intellectual property rights, and may face significant
expenses as a result of ongoing or future litigation. Also, we are now and may again become involved in litigation relating to alleged infringement by us of others patents or other intellectual property rights. This kind of litigation is frequently expensive to both the winning party and the losing party and takes up significant amounts of managements time and attention. In addition, if we lose such a lawsuit, a court could require us to pay substantial damages and/or royalties, or prohibit us from using essential technologies. For these and other reasons, this kind of litigation could seriously harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Also, although we may seek to obtain a license under a third partys intellectual property rights in order to bring an end to certain claims or actions asserted against us, we may not be able to obtain such a license on reasonable terms or at all. We have entered into technology license agreements with third parties that give those parties the right to use patents and other technology developed by us, and that give us the right to use patents and other technology developed by them. We anticipate that we will continue to enter into these kinds of licensing arrangements in the future. It is possible, however, that licenses we want will not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms. If we lose existing licenses to key technology, or are unable to enter into new licensing agreements, which we deem important, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed. It is critical to our success that we are able to prevent competitors from copying our innovations, we therefore intend to continue to seek patent, trade secret and mask work protection for our semiconductor manufacturing technologies. The process of seeking patent protection can be long and expensive, and we cannot be certain that any currently pending or future applications will actually result in issued patents, or that, even if patents are issued, that they will be of sufficient scope or strength to provide meaningful protection or any commercial advantage to us. Furthermore, others may develop technologies that are similar or superior to our technology or design around the patents we own. We also rely on trade secret protection for our technology, in part through confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants and third parties. However, these parties may breach these agreements, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. Also, others may come to know about or determine our trade secrets through a variety of methods. In addition, the laws of certain territories in which we develop, manufacture or sell our products may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Our financial results could
be adversely impacted if we fail to develop, introduce and sell new products or
fail to develop and implement new manufacturing technologies. |
For Cypress and many other semiconductor companies, introduction of new products is a major manufacturing challenge. The new products the market requires tend to be increasingly complex, incorporating more functions and operating at greater speed than prior products. Increasing complexity generally requires smaller features on a chip. This makes manufacturing new generations of products substantially more difficult than prior products. Ultimately, whether we can successfully introduce these and other new products depends on our ability to develop and implement new ways of manufacturing semiconductors. If we are unable to design, develop, manufacture, market and sell new products successfully, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be seriously harmed. Interruptions in the
availability of raw materials can seriously harm our financial performance. Problems in the performance
of other companies we hire to perform certain manufacturing tasks can seriously
harm our financial performance. The complex nature of our
manufacturing activities makes us highly susceptible to manufacturing problems
and these problems can have substantial negative impact when they occur. We may not be able to use
all of our existing or future manufacturing capacity, which can negatively
impact our business. Our operations and
financial results could be severely harmed by certain natural disasters. |
Our business, results of
operations and financial condition will be seriously harmed if we fail to
successfully compete in our highly competitive industry and markets. Our ability to compete successfully in the rapidly evolving high performance portion of the semiconductor technology industry depends on many factors, including: |
| Our success in developing new products and manufacturing technologies; |
| The quality and price of our products; |
| The diversity of our product lines; |
| The cost effectiveness of our design, development, manufacturing and marketing efforts; |
| The pace at which customers incorporate our products into their systems; and |
| The number and nature of our competitors and general economic conditions. |
Although we believe we currently compete effectively in the above areas to the extent they are within our control, given the pace of change in the industry, our current abilities are not a guarantee of future success. We must build
semiconductors based on our forecasts of demand, and if our forecasts are
inaccurate, we may have large amounts of unsold products or we may not be able
to fill all orders. We must spend heavily on
equipment to stay competitive, and will be adversely impacted if we are unable
to secure financing for such investments. If we are unable to reduce the costs for our products at a rate at least as fast as the rate of decline in average selling prices for such products, we may not be able to generate enough cash flow from operations to maintain or increase manufacturing capability and capacity as necessary. In such a situation we would need to seek financing from external sources to satisfy our needs for manufacturing equipment and, if cash flow from operations declines too much, for operational cash needs as well. Such financing, however, may not be available on terms which are satisfactory to us or at all, in which case our business, financial condition and results of operations will be seriously harmed. |
We compete with others to
attract and retain key personnel, and any loss of, or inability to attract, such
personnel would harm us. We face additional problems
and uncertainties associated with international operations that could seriously
harm us. |
| currency exchange fluctuations, |
| political instability, |
| changes in local economic conditions, |
| the devaluation of local currencies, |
| import and export controls, and |
| changes in tax laws, tariffs and freight rates. |
To the extent any such risks materialize, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed. We are subject to many
different environmental regulations, and compliance with them may be costly. We depend on third parties
to transport our products and could be harmed if these parties experience
problems. We may fail to integrate
our business and technologies with those of companies we have recently acquired
and that we may acquire in the future. |
| the difficulty of integrating acquired technology or products; |
| the difficulty of assimilating the personnel of the acquired companies; |
| the difficulty of coordinating and integrating geographically dispersed operations; |
| our ability to retain customers of the acquired company; |
| the potential disruption of our on-going business and distraction of management; |
| the maintenance of brand recognition of acquired businesses; |
| the failure to successfully develop acquired in-process technology, resulting in the impairment of amounts currently capitalized as intangible assets; unanticipated expenses related to technology integration; |
| the maintenance of uniform standards, corporate cultures, controls, procedures and policies; |
| the impairment of relationships with employees and customers as a result of any integration of new management personnel; and |
| the potential unknown liabilities associated with acquired businesses. |
We face a number of unknown risks associated with the year 2000 problem.The year 2000 computer issue creates a variety of risks for us. The year 2000 computer problem refers to the potential for system and processing failures of date-related data as a result of computer-controlled systems using two digits rather than four to define the applicable year. For example, computer programs that have time-sensitive software may recognize a date represented as 00 as the year 1900 rather than the year 2000. This could result in a system failure or miscalculations causing disruptions of operations, including amount other things, interruptions in manufacturing, design and process development operations, disruptions in processing business transactions, and disruptions in other normal business activities. Issues related to the year 2000 computer problem could still arise. The risks involve: |
| potential warranty or other claims by customers with respect to errors in our products; |
| errors in systems we use to run our business; |
| errors in systems used by our suppliers; |
| errors in systems used by customers; and |
| potential reduced spending by customers as a result of concerns about potential year 2000 problems. |
We have designed most of our products to be year 2000 compliant and have developed corrective measures for other products that were not originally designed to be year 2000 compliant. However, our products may be integrated into or used in conjunction with products supplied by other vendors. We cannot evaluate whether all of the products of other vendors are year 2000 compliant. We may face claims based on year 2000 problems in other companies products. We may in the future be required to defend our products in legal proceedings, which could be expensive regardless of the merits of these claims. If our suppliers, vendors, partners, customers and service providers fail to correct their year 2000 problems, these failures could result in an interruption in, or a failure of, our normal business activities or operations. If a year 2000 problem occurs, it may be difficult to determine which partys products have caused the problem. These failures could interrupt our operations and damage our relationships with customers. Due to the general uncertainty inherent in the year 2000 problem resulting from the readiness of third-party suppliers and vendors, we are unable to determine at this time whether third-party year 2000 failures could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. |
Total Votes For Each Director |
Total Votes Withheld From Each Director | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T.J. Rodgers | 98,778,474 | 649,941 | |||||
Fred B. Bialek | 97,794,369 | 1,634,046 | |||||
Eric A. Benhamou | 98,741,624 | 686,791 | |||||
John C. Lewis | 98,764,525 | 663,890 | |||||
Alan F. Shugart | 98,727,311 | 701,104 |
(2) Ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as the Independent Accountants of Cypress for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2000: |
For | 99,228,003 | Against | 130,721 | Abstain | 70,291 |
(3) To approve the amendment to our Restated Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of our common stock and to clarify our existing policy for the indemnification of our officers, directors, employees and agents. |
For | 78,703,402 | Against | 20,611,501 | ||||||
Abstain | 114,112 | Broker Non-Vote | 113,512 |
Item 6 Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K |
a. | Exhibits |
Exhibit | 27.1Financial Data Schedule. |
b. | Reports on Form 8-K |
On June 14, 2000, Cypress filed a report on Form 8-K, which reported under Item 5, that on May 24, 2000, we completed a merger with Alation Systems, Inc. which was accounted for as a pooling of interests. Pursuant to Item 7, we attached the Consolidated Financial Statements reflecting the merger with Alation. On June 16, 2000, we filed a report on Form 8-K/A, which reported under Item 7 corrections to the report of independent accountants and Exhibit 23.1. On June 21, 2000, we filed a report on Form 8-K, which reported under Item 7 Exhibits 12.1 and 99.1 related to our 3.75% Convertible Subordinated Notes due in 2005. |
SIGNATURES Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized. |
CYPRESS SEMICONDUCTOR CORORATION By: /s/ T.J. RODGERS T.J. Rodgers President and Chief Executive Officer |
By: /s/ EMMANUEL HERNANDEZ Emmanuel Hernandez Vice President, Finance and Administration and Chief Financial Officer |
Dated: August 16, 2000 |
|