e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
April 24, 2009
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission File Number 0-27130
NetApp, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
77-0307520
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
|
|
(IRS Employer
|
incorporation or
organization)
|
|
Identification
No.)
|
495 East Java Drive,
Sunnyvale, California 94089
(Address of principal
executive offices, including zip code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(408) 822-6000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Exchange on Which Registered
|
Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value
|
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
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 o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No 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 o
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 o No o
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 o
Indicate by a 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. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer þ
|
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of voting stock held by
non-affiliates of the registrant, as of October 24, 2008,
the last day of registrants most recently completed second
fiscal quarter, was $3,421,803,943 (based on the closing price
for shares of the registrants common stock as reported by
the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the last business day prior
to that date). Shares of common stock held by each executive
officer, director, and holder of 5% or more of the outstanding
common stock have been excluded in that such persons may be
deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status
is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
On June 12, 2009, 335,543,451 shares of the
registrants common stock, $0.001 par value, were
outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The information called for by Part III of this
Form 10-K
is hereby incorporated by reference from the definitive Proxy
Statement for our annual meeting of stockholders, which will be
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than
120 days after April 24, 2009.
PART I
Forward
Looking Statements
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (the Exchange Act), and is subject to the
safe harbor provisions set forth in the Exchange Act.
Forward-looking statements usually contain the words
estimate, intend, plan,
predict, seek, may,
will, should, would,
could, anticipate, expect,
believe, or similar expressions and variations or
negatives of these words. In addition, any statements that refer
to expectations, projections, or other characterizations of
future events or circumstances, including any underlying
assumptions, are forward-looking statements. All forward-looking
statements, including but not limited to, statements about:
|
|
|
|
|
our future financial and operating results;
|
|
|
|
our business strategies;
|
|
|
|
managements plans, beliefs and objectives for future
operations, research and development,
|
|
|
|
acquisitions and joint ventures, growth opportunities,
investments and legal proceedings;
|
|
|
|
our restructuring plans and estimates;
|
|
|
|
competitive positions;
|
|
|
|
product introductions, development, enhancements and acceptance;
|
|
|
|
economic and industry trends or trend analyses
|
|
|
|
future cash flows and cash deployment strategies;
|
|
|
|
short-term and long-term cash requirements;
|
|
|
|
the impact of completed acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
our anticipated tax rate;
|
|
|
|
the continuation of our stock repurchase program;
|
|
|
|
compliance with laws, regulations and loan covenants; and
|
|
|
|
the conversion, maturation or repurchase of the Notes,
|
are inherently uncertain as they are based on managements
current expectations and assumptions concerning future events,
and they are subject to numerous known and unknown risks and
uncertainties. Therefore, our actual results may differ
materially from the forward-looking statements contained herein.
Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially
from those described herein include, but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
the amount of orders received in future periods;
|
|
|
|
our ability to ship our products in a timely manner;
|
|
|
|
our ability to achieve anticipated pricing, cost, and gross
margins levels;
|
|
|
|
our ability to maintain or increase backlog and increase revenue;
|
|
|
|
our ability to successfully execute on our strategy
|
|
|
|
our ability to increase our customer base, market share and
revenue;
|
|
|
|
our ability to successfully introduce new products;
|
|
|
|
our ability to adapt to changes in market demand;
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
the general economic environment and the growth of the storage
markets;
|
|
|
|
acceptance of, and demand for, our products;
|
|
|
|
demand for our global service and support and professional
services;
|
|
|
|
our ability to identify and respond to significant market trends
and emerging standards;
|
|
|
|
our ability to realize our financial objectives through
management of our investment in people, process, and systems;
|
|
|
|
our ability to maintain our supplier and contract manufacturer
relationships;
|
|
|
|
the ability of our suppliers and contract manufacturers to meet
our requirements;
|
|
|
|
the ability of our competitors to introduce new products that
compete successfully with our products;
|
|
|
|
our ability to grow direct and indirect sales and to efficiently
utilize global service and support;
|
|
|
|
the general economic environment and the growth of the storage
markets;
|
|
|
|
variability in our gross margins;
|
|
|
|
our ability to sustain
and/or
improve our cash and overall financial position;
|
|
|
|
our cash requirements and terms and availability of financing;
|
|
|
|
valuation and liquidity of our investment portfolio;
|
|
|
|
our ability to finance business acquisitions, construction
projects and capital expenditures through cash from operations
and/or
financing;
|
|
|
|
the impact of industry consolidation
|
|
|
|
the results of our ongoing litigation, tax audits, government
audits and inquiries; and
|
|
|
|
those factors discussed under Risk Factors elsewhere
in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
|
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these
forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date
hereof and are based upon information available to us at this
time. These statements are not guarantees of future performance.
We disclaim any obligation to update information in any
forward-looking statement. Actual results could vary from our
forward looking statements due to foregoing factors as well as
other important factors, including those described in the Risk
Factors included on page 11.
Overview
NetApp, Inc. (NetApp) is a leading provider of
storage and data management solutions. We offer solutions for
storing, managing, protecting and archiving business data. Our
solutions are designed to lower the cost of managing and
protecting our customers data while increasing their
agility and competitiveness.
We offer complete solutions to help customers effectively
streamline operations and lower the cost associated with storing
and managing their data. We strive to provide the best
experience in the industry with every interaction customers have
with our people, products and services. In addition to our broad
range of storage and data management solutions, we provide
global service and support and work to simplify customer
environments by utilizing open standards and through close
collaboration and partnerships with other industry leaders. We
help solve customer business challenges while helping them
maximize return on investment through a combination of products,
technologies, services, and partnerships.
Our products and services are designed to meet the expansive
requirements and demanding service levels of large enterprises
and their mission-critical business applications. To better meet
these needs, we partner with key industry leaders, such as IBM
Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, Oracle Corporation, SAP
Corporation, Symantec Corporation and VMware, Inc., to develop
integrated solutions that optimize the performance of
customers applications and their infrastructure. In
addition, our products have been designed to satisfy the
rigorous
4
demands of high performance computing and technical data center
applications, offering solutions used in the design of
semiconductors and automobiles, as well as graphics rendering
and seismic exploration.
We were incorporated in 1992 and shipped the worlds first
networked storage appliance a year later. Since then, we have
brought to market many significant innovations and industry
firsts in storage and data management. We have grown to over
7,900 employees with operations in over 130 offices around
the world.
NetApp
Product Families
We offer highly available, scalable and cost-effective storage
solutions that incorporate our unified storage platform and the
feature-rich functionality of our data and storage resource
management software. Our solutions help improve enterprise
productivity, performance and profitability, while providing
investment protection and enhanced asset utilization. Our
enterprise-class storage solutions are complemented by our
services expertise to enable interoperability and optimization
in the context of the application and information technology
(IT) infrastructure within which they are deployed.
Data
ONTAP®
Software
Our Fabric-Attached Storage (FAS) and V-Series
storage solutions are based on Data ONTAP, a highly optimized,
scalable and flexible operating system that uniquely supports
any mix of storage area network (SAN),
network-attached storage (NAS) and Internet protocol
SAN (IP SAN) environments concurrently. This unified
storage software platform integrates seamlessly into
UNIX®,
Linux®,
Windows®
and Web environments.
The Data ONTAP operating system provides the foundation to build
a storage infrastructure and an enterprise-wide data fabric for
mission-critical business applications, while lowering the total
cost of ownership and complexity typically associated with the
management of large-scale enterprise data centers.
Data ONTAP GX, our high-performance operating system, supports
fully integrated, multi-node storage systems within a single
global name space. This storage grid architecture provides the
ability to dynamically add storage resources and transparently
redistribute data without disruption to client systems. We have
been integrating the Data ONTAP GX functionality with the core
Data ONTAP capabilities in order to converge both into a single
operating system.
Data
Management Software
Our products are in use today in some of the largest data
centers in the world. These environments require
enterprise-class management tools. We provide management
software to increase productivity and simplify data management.
Such tools include:
|
|
|
|
|
FlexVol®
technology, which enables storage architectures to be more
efficient and achieve higher utilization using flexible volumes
that do not require repartitioning of physical storage space;
|
|
|
|
FlexClone®
technology, which enables true data cloning using logical
copies that do not require additional physical storage space,
and allows for instant replication of data volumes and data sets;
|
|
|
|
Deduplication technology, which provides the ability to
eliminate duplicate data within primary and secondary disk
storage environments, resulting in greater efficiency and higher
utilization of storage capacity;
|
|
|
|
FlexSharetm
technology, which directs how storage system resources are used
to deliver an appropriate level of service for each application;
|
|
|
|
FlexCachetm
technology, which allows performance acceleration through the
creation of read-only cached volumes by creating caching volumes
on multiple storage controllers; and
|
|
|
|
MultiStore®
software, which allows partitioning of individual physical
storage systems into multiple separate logical partitions.
|
5
Storage
Management and Application Integration Software
Our management software family of products provides a broad
range of storage and data management tools to simplify IT
administration and enhance flexibility and productivity. We
deliver differentiated products and collaborate with industry
open standards and interfaces to deliver this value to
customers. We have four suites of products targeted to different
IT administrative roles: Storage Suite, Server Suite, Database
Suite and Application Suite. The software products within these
suites are tightly integrated with database and business
applications software from partners such as Microsoft, Oracle,
SAP and VMware in order to optimize the performance of those
applications on our storage systems. Our product offering
extends into data center automation which provides the
capability to monitor service levels, manage performance and
support change management in complex enterprise SAN environments.
FAS Family
Our family of modular, scalable, highly available, unified
networked storage systems provides seamless access to a full
range of enterprise data for users on a variety of platforms.
The FAS 6000, FAS 3000, and the FAS 2000 series
of fabric-attached enterprise storage systems are designed to
consolidate UNIX, Windows, NAS, Fibre Channel (FC),
Internet Small Computer Systems Interface (iSCSI),
SAN and Web data in central locations running over the standard
connection types: Gigabit Ethernet, FC and parallel SCSI (for
backup). Our design optimizes and consolidates high-performance
data access for individuals in multi-user environments as well
as for application servers and server clusters with dedicated
access. All of our FAS systems are interoperable and run the
highly efficient Data ONTAP operating system.
V-Series Family
Our V-Series is a network-based virtualization solution that
consolidates storage from different suppliers behind our data
management interface, providing SAN and NAS access to the data
stored in heterogeneous storage arrays. With the V-Series
solution, customers are able to: transform existing
heterogeneous, multi-vendor storage systems into a single
storage pool; simplify storage provisioning and management with
Data ONTAP thin provisioning; and dramatically lower backup
time, space and cost with Data ONTAP
Snapshottm
copies. The V-Series is compatible with the FAS family of
storage systems.
VTL
Data Protection Systems
Our Virtual Tape Library (VTL) solution is a
disk-to-disk backup appliance that appears as a tape library to
a backup software application, but provides the superior speed
and reliability of disk technologies. Our VTL is a
high-performance, easily managed system that can be used in any
heterogeneous primary storage environment. Developed
specifically to address the requirements of backup
administrators, our VTL solutions increase the performance and
reliability of backups, simplify backup management and reduce
storage costs in traditional data center tape backup
infrastructures.
Data
Protection Software Products
We offer a broad range of business continuance and disk backup
solutions for enterprise customer environments. Our Snapshot
technology enables near-instantaneous, space efficient online
backups of large data sets without affecting system performance.
MetroCluster,
SnapMirror®,
SyncMirror®
and
SnapRestore®
products provide an appropriate level of data availability and
cost of protection matched to the recovery point objectives and
recovery time objectives of customer environments.
SnapVault®,
Open Systems SnapVault and SnapVault for
NetBackuptm
products provide network- and storage-optimized disk-to-disk
backup solutions.
Data
Retention and Archive Products
To meet growing regulatory compliance demands faced by most
enterprises, we offer a broad suite of products to help enable
data permanence, accessibility and privacy across a variety of
different regulations such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
21 CFR Part 11, SEC
Rule 17a-4
and HIPAA. Immutable, cost-effective, resilient and reliable
storage architectures can be created utilizing
SnapLock®
products.
6
Storage
Security Products
Security has become a critical element of data management, and
we have taken a leading role in driving security innovation. Our
DataFort storage security appliance provides a unified
platform for data security and key management across NAS, IP
SAN, FC SAN and tape backup environments. The platform combines
wire-speed encryption, access controls, authentication and
automated key management to provide strong security for data at
rest, while still allowing the capability to search compliant
data for legal discovery purposes if the need arises.
Performance
Acceleration Module
The NetApp Performance Acceleration Module (PAM) optimizes the
performance of random read intensive workloads such as file
services and messaging. NetApp created this intelligent read
cache to reduce storage latency and increase I/O throughput
without adding more fast-spinning disk drives.
NetApp
Global Services
Our customers demand high availability and reliability of their
storage infrastructure to ensure the successful, ongoing
operation of their businesses. NetApps global services are
designed with this in mind. We provide professional services,
global support solutions and customer education and training to
help customers most effectively manage their data. The
professional services and support solutions we offer help our
customers to resolve business problems, reduce costs, keep
businesses up and running continuously, comply with regulations
and policies and improve overall operational results. We utilize
a global, integrated model to provide consistent service
delivery and global support during every phase of the customer
engagement, including assessment and analysis, planning, design,
installation, implementation, integration, optimization, ongoing
support and remote management and monitoring. Services and
support often involve phased rollouts, technology transitions
and migrations and other long-term engagements.
Principal
Markets and Distribution Channels
We market and sell our products in numerous countries throughout
the world and we continue to make investments in our multi-year
branding and awareness campaign to increase visibility of NetApp
in the broader IT segment. Our diversified customer base
represents a number of large segments and vertical markets. We
focus primarily on the data management and storage markets,
offering an array of solutions from our ultra high-end products
designed for large enterprise customers to entry level products
designed for mid-sized enterprise customers. We have also
expanded into the VTL and data encryption markets, bringing us
into parts of the data center in which we have not previously
competed. We offer storage grid architecture to high-performance
computing environments with our next-generation operating
system, Data ONTAP GX.
We employ a multi-channel distribution strategy, selling
products and services to end users through a direct sales force,
value-added resellers, system integrators, original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) and distributors. During fiscal
2009, two U.S. distributors accounted for approximately
10.5% and 10.6% of our net revenues, respectively. No customer
accounted for ten percent or more of our net revenues during
fiscal 2008 and 2007.
Seasonality
As the size of our business has grown, we have begun to see a
seasonal decline in revenues in the first quarter of our fiscal
year. In addition, we also see some international seasonality,
as sales to European customers are historically weaker during
the summer months. Sales to the U.S. government tend to be
seasonally stronger during our second fiscal quarter, concurrent
with the end of the U.S. federal governments fiscal
year in September. Additionally, we derive a majority of our
revenue in any given quarter from orders booked in the same
quarter. Bookings typically follow intraquarter seasonality
patterns weighted toward the back end of the quarter.
Backlog
We manufacture products based on a combination of specific order
requirements and forecasts of our customers demand. Orders
are generally placed by customers on an as-needed basis.
Products are typically shipped
7
within one to four weeks following receipt of an order. In
certain circumstances, customers may cancel or reschedule orders
without penalty. For these reasons, orders may not
constitute a firm backlog and may not be a meaningful indicator
of future revenues.
Manufacturing
and Supply Chain
We have outsourced manufacturing operations to third parties
located in Memphis, Tennessee; Fremont, California,
San Jose, California; Olive Branch, Mississippi;
Livingston, Scotland; Shanghai, China; Singapore; and Schiphol
Airport, The Netherlands. These operations include materials
procurement, commodity management, component engineering, test
engineering, manufacturing engineering, product assembly,
product assurance, quality control, final test and global
logistics. We rely on a limited number of suppliers for
materials, as well as several key subcontractors for the
production of certain subassemblies and finished systems. We
multi-source wherever possible to mitigate supply risk. Our
strategy has been to develop close relationships with our
suppliers, exchanging critical information and implementing
joint quality programs. We also use contract manufacturers for
the production of major subassemblies to improve our
manufacturing redundancy. This manufacturing strategy minimizes
capital investments and overhead expenditures and creates
flexibility for rapid expansion. We were awarded ISO 9001
certification on May 29, 1997 and continue to be ISO 9001
certified. We were awarded ISO 14001 certification on
December 8, 2004 and continue to be ISO 14001 certified.
Research
and Development
We conduct research and development activities in various
locations throughout the world. In fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007,
research and development expenses represented 14.6%, 13.7% and
13.7% of our net revenues, respectively. These costs relate
primarily to personnel and related costs incurred to conduct
product development activities. Although we develop many of our
products internally, we may acquire technology through business
combinations or through licensing from third parties when
appropriate. We believe that technical leadership is essential
to our success and we expect to continue to commit substantial
resources to research and development.
Competition
We compete with many companies in the markets we serve,
including companies that offer a broad spectrum of IT products
and services and others that offer specific storage and data
management products or services. In the storage market, our
primary and near-line storage system products and our associated
software portfolio compete primarily with storage system
products and data management software from EMC, Hitachi Data
Systems, HP, IBM and Sun Microsystems. In addition, Dell, Inc.
is a competitor in the storage marketplace through its business
arrangement with EMC, which allows Dell to resell EMC storage
hardware and software products, as well as through its
acquisition of EqualLogic through which Dell offers low-priced
storage solutions. In the secondary storage market, which
includes the disk-to-disk backup, compliance and business
continuity segments, our solutions compete primarily against
products from EMC and Sun Microsystems. Our VTL products also
compete with traditional tape backup solutions in the broader
data backup/recovery space. Additionally, a number of small,
newer companies have recently entered the storage systems and
data management software markets, the near-line and VTL storage
markets and the high-performance clustered storage markets some
of which may become significant competitors in the future.
We believe that most of these companies compete based on their
market presence, products, service or price. Some of these
companies also compete by offering storage and data management
products or services together with other IT products or
services, at minimal or no additional cost in order to preserve
or gain market share.
We believe that we have a number of competitive advantages over
many of these companies, including product innovation and the
relationships we have with our customers and partners. We
believe the advantages of our products include functionality,
scalability, performance, quality and operational efficiency. We
believe our advantages in customer and partner relationships
include a worldwide storage and data management-focused direct
sales force, a broad network of channel partners, relationships
with enterprise software vendors, and service offerings that
enable us to provide our customers with a full range of
expertise before, during and after their purchase of solutions
from us.
8
Customer
Base
Our diversified customer base spans a number of large segments
and vertical markets. Examples include: energy, financial
services, government, high technology, internet, life sciences
and healthcare services, major manufacturing, media,
entertainment, animation and video postproduction and
telecommunications.
Segment,
Geographic Information and Classes of Similar Product and
Services
See Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
accompanying this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Information about our classes of similar product and services is
included in Item 8 Financial Statements
and Supplementary Data under the heading
Consolidated Statements of Operations and
Notes to consolidated financial statements and is
incorporated herein by reference.
Proprietary
Rights
We currently rely on a combination of copyright and trademark
laws, trade secrets, confidentiality procedures, contractual
provisions, and patents to protect our proprietary rights. We
seek to protect our software, documentation, and other written
materials under trade secret, copyright, and patent laws, which
afford only limited protection. We have registered our NetApp
name and logo, Network Appliance name and logo, Data ONTAP,
DataFabric, FAServer, FlexVol, FilerView, NearStore,
SecureShare, SnapDrive, SnapLock, SnapManager, SnapMirror,
SnapRestore, SnapVault, WAFL, and others as trademarks in the
United States. Other U.S. trademarks and
U.S. registered trademarks are registered internationally
as well. We will continue to evaluate the registration of
additional trademarks as appropriate. We generally enter into
confidentiality agreements with our employees, resellers,
customers, and suppliers. We currently have multiple
U.S. and international patent applications pending and
multiple U.S. patents issued.
In addition, through various licensing arrangements, we receive
certain rights to intellectual property of others. We expect to
maintain current licensing arrangements and to secure licensing
arrangements in the future, as needed and to the extent
available on reasonable terms and conditions, to support
continued development and sales of our products and services.
Some of these licensing arrangements require or may require
royalty payments and other licensing fees. The amount of these
payments and fees may depend on various factors, including but
not limited to: the structure of royalty payments, offsetting
considerations, if any, and the degree of use of the licensed
technology.
See Item 1A Risk Factors We are exposed
to various risks related to legal proceedings or claims and
protection of intellectual property rights, which could
adversely affect our operating results.
Environmental
Disclosure
Various federal, state and local provisions regulate the use and
discharge of certain hazardous materials used in the manufacture
of our products. Failure to comply with environmental
regulations in the future could cause us to incur substantial
costs or subject us to business interruptions. We believe we are
fully compliant with all applicable environmental laws. All of
our products meet the requirements for WEEE, RoHS and China RoHS
compliance. We have maintained an Environmental Management
System since December 2004 as well as our ISO 14001
certification. As part of ISO 14001 requirements, NetApp
conducts annual review of all aspects of our operations and we
constantly monitor environmental legislation and requirements to
ensure we are taking necessary measures to continually remain in
compliance with any and all applicable laws.
Working
Capital Practices
Information about our working capital practices is included in
Item 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation
under the heading Financial Condition, Capital Resources
and Liquidity and is incorporated herein by reference.
Government
Contracts
We derive revenues from contracts with the United States
government, state and local governments and their respective
agencies. Our sales to government clients subject us to risks
including early termination, audits,
9
investigations, sanctions penalties and potential disbarment.
For more information, refer to Item 1A Risk
Factor The U.S. government has contributed to
our revenue growth and has become an important customer for
us. In addition, please refer to Item 3
Legal Proceedings for information related to our GSA
settlement.
Foreign
Operations and Export Sales
Information about our foreign operations and export sales is
included in Note 7 Segment, Geographic,
and Significant Customer Information to our consolidated
financial statements and Item 1A Risk
Factors Risks inherent in our international
operations could have a material adverse effect on our operating
results.
Employees
As of April 24, 2009, we had 7,976 employees. We have
never had a work stoppage and consider relations with our
employees to be good.
Executive
Officers
Our executive officers and their ages as of May 25, 2009,
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Daniel J. Warmenhoven
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
|
Thomas F. Mendoza
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Vice Chairman
|
Thomas Georgens
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
President and Chief Operating Officer, Board Member
|
Steven J. Gomo
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
|
Robert E. Salmon
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, Field Operations
|
Daniel J. Warmenhoven joined NetApp in October 1994 as
president and chief executive officer, and has been a member of
the Board of Directors since October 1994. Mr. Warmenhoven
currently serves as chief executive officer and as of March 2008
he was appointed chairman of the Board of Directors. Prior to
joining the Company, Mr. Warmenhoven served in various
capacities, including president, chief executive officer, and
chairman of the Board of Directors of Network Equipment
Technologies, Inc., a telecommunications equipment company, from
November 1989 to January 1994. Prior to Network Equipment
Technologies, Mr. Warmenhoven held executive and managerial
positions at Hewlett-Packard from 1985 to 1989 and IBM
Corporation from 1972 to 1985. Mr. Warmenhoven is a
Director of Aruba Networks, Inc., sits on the Bechtel Board of
Counselors, is vice chairman of the board of the Tech Museum of
Innovation in San Jose, CA and is a trustee of Bellarmine
College Preparatory in San Jose, CA. Mr. Warmenhoven
holds a B.S. degree in electrical engineering from Princeton
University.
Thomas F. Mendoza was appointed vice chairman in March
2008. Mr. Mendoza joined the company in May 1994 and served
as president from October 2000 to March 2008. Prior to March
2000, he served in various capacities at NetApp including senior
vice president, worldwide sales and marketing, senior vice
president, worldwide sales and vice president, North American
sales. Mr. Mendoza has more than 30 years of
experience as a high-technology executive and has held executive
positions at Auspex Systems, Inc. and Stratus Technologies, Inc.
He holds a B.A. degree in economics from Notre Dame and is an
alumnus of Stanford Universitys Executive Business
Program. In September 2000, the University of Notre Dame renamed
its business school the Mendoza College of Business in honor of
an endowment from Tom and his wife, Kathy.
Thomas Georgens is the president and chief operating
officer of the Company and is responsible for all product
operations and field operations worldwide. Mr. Georgens has
also been a member of the Board of Directors at NetApp since
March 2008. Mr. Georgens joined the Company in 2005 and
served as the Companys executive vice president of product
operations from January 2007 until February 2008. Prior to
January 2007, Mr. Georgens served as the Companys
executive vice president and general manager of enterprise
storage systems. Before joining NetApp, Mr. Georgens spent
nine years at Engenio, a subsidiary of LSI Logic, with the last
two years as chief executive officer. He has also served in
various other positions, including president of LSI Logic
Storage Systems
10
and executive vice president of LSI Logic. Prior to LSI Logic,
Mr. Georgens spent 11 years at EMC in a variety of
engineering and marketing positions. Mr. Georgens holds a
B.S. degree and an M.E. degree in Computer and Systems
Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute as well as an
M.B.A. degree from Babson College.
Steven J. Gomo joined NetApp in August 2002 as senior
vice president of finance and chief financial officer. He was
appointed executive vice president of finance and chief
financial officer in October 2004. Prior to joining the Company,
he served as chief financial officer for Gemplus International
S.A., headquartered in Luxembourg from November 2000 to April
2002 and as chief financial officer of Silicon Graphics, Inc.,
from February 1998 to August 2000. Prior to February 1998, he
worked at Hewlett-Packard Company for 24 years in various
positions, including financial management, corporate finance,
general management, and manufacturing. Mr. Gomo currently
serves on the board of SanDisk Corporation. Mr. Gomo holds
an M.B.A. degree from Santa Clara University and a B.S.
degree in business administration from Oregon State University.
Robert E. Salmon joined NetApp in January 1994 and was
appointed executive vice president, field operations in December
2005. Mr. Salmon has served as the Companys executive
vice president of worldwide sales since September 2004. From
August 2003 to September 2004, Mr. Salmon served as the
Companys senior vice president of worldwide sales and from
May 2000 to August 2003, Mr. Salmon served as the
Companys vice president of North American sales. Prior to
his tenure at NetApp Mr. Salmon spent nearly ten years with
Sun Microsystems and Data General Corporation. Mr. Salmon
graduated from California State University, Chico with a B.S.
degree in computer science.
Additional
Information
Our Internet address is www.netapp.com. We make available
through our Internet Web site our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we
electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the
SEC.
The SEC maintains an Internet site (www.sec.gov) that
contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other
information regarding issuers that file electronically with the
SEC. The public also may read and copy these filings at the
SECs Public Reference Room at 100 F Street,
N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Information about this Public
Reference Room is available by calling (800) SEC-0330.
The following risk factors and other information included in
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
should be carefully considered. The risks and uncertainties
described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks
and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we presently
deem less significant may also impair our business operations.
Please see page 3 of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for additional discussion of these forward-looking statements.
If any of the events or circumstances described in the following
risk factors actually occurs, our business, operating results,
and financial condition could be materially adversely
affected.
Our
operating results may be adversely affected by unfavorable
economic and market conditions, including the current economic
downturn.
We are subject to the effects of general global economic and
market conditions challenging economic conditions worldwide have
from time to time contributed, and are currently contributing,
to slowdowns in the computer, storage, and networking industries
at large, as well as the information technology (IT)
market, resulting in:
|
|
|
|
|
Reduced demand for our products as a result of continued
constraints on IT related spending by our customers;
|
|
|
|
Increased price competition for our products from competitors;
|
|
|
|
Deferment of purchases and orders by customers due to budgetary
constraints or changes in current or planned utilization of our
systems;
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
Risk of excess and obsolete inventories;
|
|
|
|
Excess facilities costs;
|
|
|
|
Higher overhead costs as a percentage of revenue;
|
|
|
|
Increased risk of losses or impairment charges related to our
investment portfolio;
|
|
|
|
Negative impacts from increased financial pressures on
customers, distributors and resellers;
|
|
|
|
Negative impacts from increased financial pressures on key
suppliers or contract manufacturers; and
|
|
|
|
Potential discontinuance of product lines or businesses and
related asset impairments.
|
The turmoil in the global credit markets, the recent instability
in the geopolitical environment in many parts of the world and
other disruptions may continue to put pressure on global
economic conditions. The economic challenges we initially
experienced in the United States have spread throughout the
world. If global economic and market conditions, or economic
conditions in the United States or other key markets, remain
uncertain, persist, or deteriorate further, we may experience
material adverse impacts on our business, operating results, and
financial condition.
Our
quarterly operating results may fluctuate, which could adversely
impact our common stock price.
We believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of
operations are not necessarily meaningful and should not be
relied upon as indicators of future performance. Our operating
results have in the past, and will continue to be, subject to
quarterly fluctuations as a result of numerous factors, some of
which may contribute to more pronounced fluctuations in an
uncertain global economic environment. These factors include,
but are not limited to, the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in demand for our products and services, in part
due to changes in general economic conditions and specific
economic conditions in the computer, storage, and networking
industries;
|
|
|
|
A shift in federal government spending patterns;
|
|
|
|
Changes in sales and implementation cycles for our products and
reduced visibility into our customers spending plans and
associated revenue;
|
|
|
|
The level of price and product competition in our target product
markets;
|
|
|
|
The impact of the current adverse economic and credit
environment on our customers, channel partners, and suppliers,
including their ability to obtain financing or to fund capital
expenditures;
|
|
|
|
The overall movement toward industry consolidations among both
our competitors and our customers;
|
|
|
|
Our reliance on a limited number of suppliers due to industry
consolidation, which could subject us to periodic
supply-and-demand,
price rigidity, and quality issues with our components;
|
|
|
|
The timing of bookings or the cancellation of significant orders;
|
|
|
|
Product configuration and mix;
|
|
|
|
The extent to which our customers renew their service and
maintenance contracts with us;
|
|
|
|
Market acceptance of new products and product enhancements;
|
|
|
|
Announcements and introductions of, and transitions to, new
products by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
Deferrals of customer orders in anticipation of new products or
product enhancements introduced by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
Our ability to develop, introduce, and market new products and
enhancements in a timely manner;
|
|
|
|
Technological changes in our target product markets;
|
|
|
|
Our levels of expenditure on research and development and sales
and marketing programs;
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
Our ability to achieve targeted cost reductions;
|
|
|
|
Adverse movements in foreign currency exchange rates as a result
of our international operations;
|
|
|
|
Excess or inadequate facilities;
|
|
|
|
Actual events, circumstances, outcomes and amounts differing
from judgments, assumptions, and estimates used in determining
the values of certain assets (including the amounts of valuation
allowances), liabilities, and other items reflected in our
consolidated financial statements;
|
|
|
|
Disruptions resulting from new systems and processes as we
continue to enhance and scale our system infrastructure;
|
|
|
|
Future accounting pronouncements and changes in accounting
rules, such as the increased use of fair value measures and the
potential requirement that U.S. registrants prepare
financial statements in accordance with International Financial
Reporting Standards (IFRS);
|
|
|
|
Seasonality, such as our historical seasonal decline in revenues
in the first quarter of our fiscal year and seasonal increase in
revenues in the second quarter of our fiscal year, with the
latter due in part to the impact of the U.S. federal
governments September 30 fiscal year end on the timing of
its orders, and
|
|
|
|
Linearity, such as our historical intraquarter revenue pattern
in which a disproportionate percentage of each quarters
total revenues occur in the last month of the quarter.
|
Due to such factors, operating results for a future period are
difficult to predict, and, therefore, prior results are not
necessarily indicative of results to be expected in future
periods. Any of the foregoing factors, or any other factors
discussed elsewhere herein, could have a material adverse effect
on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
It is possible that in one or more quarters our results may fall
below our forecasts and the expectations of public market
analysts and investors. In such event, the trading price of our
common stock would likely decrease.
Our
revenue for a particular period is difficult to forecast, and a
shortfall in revenue may harm our business and our operating
results.
Our revenues for a particular period are difficult to forecast,
especially in light of the current global economic downturn and
related market uncertainty. Product sales are also difficult to
forecast because the storage and data management market is
rapidly evolving, and our sales cycle varies substantially from
customer to customer. New or additional product introductions
also increase the complexities of forecasting revenues.
Additionally, we derive a majority of our revenue in any given
quarter from orders booked in the same quarter. Bookings
typically follow intraquarter seasonality patterns weighted
toward the back end of the quarter. If we do not achieve
bookings in the latter part of a quarter consistent with our
quarterly targets, our financial results will be adversely
impacted.
We use a pipeline system, a common industry
practice, to forecast bookings and trends in our business. Sales
personnel monitor the status of potential business and estimate
when a customer will make a purchase decision, the dollar amount
of the sale and the products or services to be sold. These
estimates are aggregated periodically to generate a bookings
pipeline. Our pipeline estimates may prove to be unreliable
either in a particular quarter or over a longer period of time,
in part because the conversion rate of the pipeline
into contracts varies from customer to customer, can be
difficult to estimate, and requires management judgment. Small
deviations from our forecasted conversion rate may result in
inaccurate plans and budgets and could materially and adversely
impact our business or our planned results of operations. In
particular, the continued adverse events in the economic
environment and financial markets have made it even more
difficult for us to forecast our future results and may result
in a reduction in our quarterly conversion rate as our
customers purchasing decisions are delayed, reduced in
amount, or cancelled.
Uncertainty about current and future global economic conditions
has caused consumers, businesses and governments to defer
purchases in response to tighter credit, decreased cash
availability and declining customer confidence. Accordingly,
future demand for our products could differ from our current
expectations.
13
We
have experienced periods of alternating growth and decline in
revenues and operating expenses. If we are not able to
successfully manage these fluctuations, our business, financial
condition and results of operations could be significantly
impacted.
The ongoing global financial crisis has led to a worldwide
economic downturn that has negatively affected our business. If
the current economic downturn continues or worsens, demand for
our products and services and our revenues may be further
reduced. A prolonged downturn can adversely affect our revenues,
gross margin and results of operations. During such economic
downturns, it is critical to appropriately align our cost
structure with prevailing market conditions and to minimize the
effect of such downturns on our operations, while also
maintaining our capabilities and strategic investments for
future growth.
Our expense levels are based in part on our expectations as to
future revenues, and a significant percentage of our expenses
are fixed. We have a limited ability to quickly or significantly
reduce our fixed costs, and if revenue levels are below our
expectations, operating results will be adversely impacted.
During uneven periods of growth, we may incur costs before we
realize some of the anticipated benefits, which could harm our
operating results. We have significant investments in
engineering, sales, service support, marketing programs and
other functions to support and grow our business. We are likely
to recognize the costs associated with these investments earlier
than some of the anticipated benefits, and the return on these
investments may be lower, or may develop more slowly, than we
expect, which could harm our business, operating results and
financial condition.
Conversely, if we are unable to effectively manage our resources
and capacity, during periods of increasing demand for our
products, we could experience a material adverse effect on
operations and financial results. If the network storage market
fails to grow, or grows slower than we expect, our revenues will
be adversely affected. Also, even if IT spending increases, our
revenue may not grow at the same pace.
Our
gross margins have varied over time and may continue to vary,
and such variation may make it more difficult to forecast our
earnings.
Our product gross margins have been and may continue to be
affected by a variety of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Demand for storage and data management products;
|
|
|
|
Pricing actions, rebates, initiatives, discount levels, and
price competition;
|
|
|
|
Direct versus indirect and OEM sales;
|
|
|
|
Changes in customer, geographic, or product mix, including mix
of configurations within each product group;
|
|
|
|
Product and add-on software mix;
|
|
|
|
The mix of services as a percentage of revenue;
|
|
|
|
The mix and average selling prices of products;
|
|
|
|
The mix of disk content;
|
|
|
|
The timing of revenue recognition and revenue deferrals;
|
|
|
|
New product introductions and enhancements;
|
|
|
|
Excess inventory purchase commitments as a result of changes in
demand forecasts and possible product and software defects as we
transition our products; and
|
|
|
|
The cost of components, manufacturing labor, quality, warranty,
and freight.
|
Changes in software entitlements and maintenance gross margins
may result from various factors, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
The size of the installed base of products under support
contracts;
|
|
|
|
The timing of technical support service contract renewals;
|
|
|
|
Demand for and the timing of delivery of upgrades;
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
The timing of our technical support service initiatives; and
|
|
|
|
The level of spending on our customer support infrastructure.
|
Changes in service gross margins may result from various
factors, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
The mix of customers;
|
|
|
|
The size and timing of service contract renewals;
|
|
|
|
The volume and use of outside partners to deliver support
services on our behalf; and
|
|
|
|
Product quality and serviceability issues.
|
Due to such factors, gross margins are subject to variations
from period to period and are difficult to predict.
Our
cost-reduction initiatives and restructuring plans may not
result in anticipated savings or more efficient operations. Our
recently-announced restructuring may disrupt our operations and
adversely affect our operations and financial
results.
On February 11, 2009, in response to the worsening global
economic conditions and uncertainty about future IT spending, we
announced a restructuring of our worldwide operations in an
effort to strategically align our cost structure with expected
revenues, as well as to reallocate resources into areas of our
business with more growth potential.
Additionally, in December 2008, we decided to cease development
and availability of our
SnapMirror®
for Open Systems (SMOS) product, and as a result
recorded restructuring and other charges attributable primarily
to severance and employee-related and facility closure costs, as
well as the impairment of certain acquired intangible assets.
We may not be able to successfully complete and realize the
expected benefits of these restructuring plans. Our
restructuring plans may involve higher costs or a longer
timetable, or they may fail to improve our gross margins,
results of operations and cash flows as we anticipate. Our
inability to realize these benefits may result in an ineffective
business structure that could negatively impact our results of
operations. In addition to costs related to severance and other
employee-related costs, our restructuring plans may also subject
us to litigation risks and expenses.
In addition, our restructuring plans may have other adverse
consequences, such as attrition beyond our planned reduction in
workforce, the loss of employees with valuable knowledge or
expertise, a negative impact on employee morale, or a gain in
competitive advantage by our competitors over us. The
restructuring efforts could also be disruptive to our day-to-day
operations and cause our remaining employees to be less
productive, which in turn may affect our revenue and other
operating results in the future. In the event that the economy
recovers sooner than we expect and results in increased IT
spending, we may not have sufficient capacity to capitalize on
the related increase in demand for our products and services.
We may undertake future cost-reduction initiatives and
restructuring plans that may adversely impact our operations;
and we may not realize all of the anticipated benefits of our
prior or any future restructurings.
Changes
in market conditions have led, and in the future could lead, to
charges related to the discontinuance of certain of our products
and asset impairments.
In response to changes in economic conditions and market
demands, we may be required to strategically realign our
resources and consider cost containment measures including
restructuring, disposing of, or otherwise discontinuing certain
products. Any decision to limit investment in, dispose of, or
otherwise exit products may result in the recording of charges
to earnings, such as inventory and technology-related or other
intangible asset write-offs, workforce reduction costs, charges
relating to consolidation of excess facilities, cancellation
penalties or claims from third parties who were resellers or
users of discontinued products, which would harm our operating
results. Our estimates with respect to the useful life or
ultimate recoverability of our carrying basis of assets,
including purchased intangible assets, could change as a result
of such assessments and decisions. Additionally, we
15
are required to perform goodwill impairment tests on an annual
basis, and between annual tests in certain circumstances when
impairment indicators exist or if certain events or changes in
circumstances have occurred. Future goodwill impairment tests
may result in charges to earnings, which could materially harm
our operating results.
Our
OEM relationship with IBM may not continue to generate
significant revenue.
In April 2005, we entered into an OEM agreement with IBM, which
enables IBM to sell IBM branded solutions based on NetAppunified
solutions, including
NearStore®
and V-Series systems, as well as associated software offerings.
While this agreement is an element of our strategy to expand our
reach into more customers and countries, we do not have an
exclusive relationship with IBM, and there is no minimum
commitment for any given period of time; therefore, this
relationship may not continue to contribute revenue in future
years. In addition, we have no control over the products that
IBM selects to sell, or its release schedule and timing of those
products; nor do we control its pricing. In the event that sales
through IBM increase, we may experience distribution channel
conflicts between our direct sales force and IBM or among our
channel partners. If we fail to minimize channel conflicts, our
operating results and financial condition could be harmed. We
cannot assure you that this OEM relationship will continue to
generate significant revenue while the agreement is in effect,
or that the relationship will continue to be in effect for any
specific period of time.
If we
are unable to maintain our existing relationships and develop
new relationships with major strategic partners, our revenue may
be impacted negatively.
An element of our strategy to increase revenue is to
strategically partner with major third-party software and
hardware vendors that integrate our products into their products
and also co-market our products with these vendors. We have
significant partner relationships with database, business
application, backup management and server virtualization
companies, including Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, Symantec and
VMware. A number of these strategic partners are industry
leaders that offer us expanded access to segments of the storage
market. There is intense competition for attractive strategic
partners, and even if we can establish relationships with these
or other partners, these partnerships may not generate
significant revenue or may not continue to be in effect for any
specific period of time. If these relationships fail to
materialize as expected, we could suffer delays in product
development or other operational difficulties.
We intend to continue to establish and maintain business
relationships with technology companies to accelerate the
development and marketing of our storage solutions. To the
extent that we are unsuccessful in developing new relationships
or maintaining our existing relationships, our future revenue
and operating results could be impacted negatively. In addition,
the loss of a strategic partner could have a material adverse
effect on our revenues and operating results.
Disruption
of or changes in our distribution model could harm our
sales.
If we fail to manage distribution of our products and services
properly, or if our distributors financial condition or
operations weaken, our revenue and gross margins could be
adversely affected.
We market and sell our storage solutions directly through our
worldwide sales force and indirectly through channel partners
such as value-added resellers, systems integrators,
distributors, OEMs and strategic business partners, and we
derive a significant portion of our revenue from these channel
partners. During fiscal 2009, revenues generated from sales
through our channel partners accounted for 69.0% of our
revenues. In order for us to maintain or increase our revenues,
we must effectively manage our relationships with channel
partners.
Several factors could result in disruption of or changes in our
distribution model, which could materially harm our revenues and
gross margins, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
We compete with some of our channel partners through our direct
sales force, which may lead these partners to use other
suppliers who do not directly sell their own products;
|
|
|
|
Our channel partners may demand that we absorb a greater share
of the risks that their customers may ask them to bear;
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
Our channel partners may have insufficient financial resources
and may not be able to withstand changes and challenges in
business conditions; and
|
|
|
|
Revenue from indirect sales could suffer if our channel
partners financial condition or operations weaken.
|
In addition, we depend on our channel partners to comply with
applicable regulatory requirements in the jurisdictions in which
they operate. Their failure to do so could have a material
adverse effect on our revenues and operating results.
The
U.S. government has contributed to our revenue growth and has
become an important customer for us. Future revenue from the
U.S. government is subject to shifts in government spending
patterns. A decrease in government demand for our products could
materially affect our revenues. In addition, our business could
be adversely affected as a result of future examinations by the
U.S. government.
The U.S. government has become an important customer for
the storage market and for us; however, government demand is
unpredictable, and there can be no assurance that we will
maintain or grow our revenue from the U.S. government.
Government agencies are subject to budgetary processes and
expenditure constraints that could lead to delays or decreased
capital expenditures in IT spending. If the government or
individual agencies within the government reduce or shift their
capital spending patterns, our revenues and operating results
may be harmed.
In addition, selling our products to the U.S. government
also subjects us to certain regulatory requirements. The failure
to comply with these requirements could subject us to fines and
other penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on
our revenues and operating results. For example, in April 2009,
we entered into a settlement agreement with the United States of
America, acting through the United States Department of Justice
(DOJ) and on behalf of the General Services
Administration (the GSA), under which we agreed to
pay the United States $128.0 million, plus interest of
$0.7 million, related to a dispute regarding our discount
practices and compliance with the price reduction clause
provisions of its GSA contracts between August 1997 and February
2005. We are currently in discussions with the
U.S. government to demonstrate that we have implemented
processes and procedures to ensure that we comply with federal
contracting rules. If we are unable to demonstrate to the
U.S. government that we have implemented such improved
policies and procedures or if we are subject to an adverse
outcome in any future examinations of our federal contracting
practices, we could be suspended or debarred from contracting
with the U.S. government generally, or with any specific
agency, which could materially and adversely affect our revenue
and operating results.
A
portion of our revenue is generated by large, recurring
purchases from various customers, resellers and distributors. A
loss, cancellation or delay in purchases by these parties has
and could continue to negatively affect our
revenue.
During fiscal 2009, two U.S. distributors accounted for
approximately 10.5% and 10.6% of our revenues, respectively. The
loss of continued orders from any of our more significant
customers, strategic partners, distributors or resellers could
cause our revenue and profitability to suffer. Our ability to
attract new customers will depend on a variety of factors,
including the cost-effectiveness, reliability, scalability,
breadth and depth of our products.
We generally do not enter into binding purchase commitments with
our customers for an extended period of time, and thus we may
not be able to continue to receive large, recurring orders from
these customers, resellers or distributors. For example, our
reseller agreements generally do not require minimum purchases
and our customers, resellers and distributors can stop
purchasing and marketing our products at any time.
Recent turmoil in the credit markets may further negatively
impact our operations by affecting the solvency of our
customers, resellers and distributors, or the ability of our
customers to obtain credit to finance purchases of our products.
If the global economy and credit markets continue to deteriorate
and our future sales decline, our financial condition and
operating results could be adversely impacted.
Because our expenses are based on our revenue forecasts, a
substantial reduction or delay in sales of our products to, or
unexpected returns from, customers and resellers, or the loss of
any significant customer or reseller,
17
could harm our business. Although our largest customers may vary
from period to period, we anticipate that our operating results
for any given period will continue to depend on large orders
from significant customers. In addition, a change in the mix of
our customers could adversely affect our revenue and gross
margins.
We are
exposed to the credit risk of some of our customers, resellers,
and distributors, as well as credit exposures in weakened
markets, which could result in material losses.
Most of our sales to customers are on an open credit basis, with
typical payment terms of 30 days in the United States
and, because of local customs or conditions, longer in some
markets outside the United States. We monitor individual
customer payment capability in granting such open credit
arrangements, and seek to limit such open credit to amounts we
believe the customers can pay. Beyond our open credit
arrangements, we also have recourse or nonrecourse customer
financing leasing arrangements with third party leasing
companies through preexisting relationships with customers.
Under the terms of recourse leases, which are treated as
off-balance sheet arrangements, we remain liable for the
aggregate unpaid remaining lease payments to the third party
leasing company in the event that any customers default. We
expect demand for customer financing to continue. During periods
of economic downturn in the storage industry and the global
economy, our exposure to credit risks from our customers
increases. In addition, our exposure to credit risks of our
customers may increase if our customers and their customers or
their lease financing sources are adversely affected by the
current global economic downturn, or if there is a continuation
or worsening of the downturn. Although we have programs in place
to monitor and mitigate the associated risks, such programs may
not be effective in reducing our credit risks.
In the past, there have been bankruptcies by our customers both
who have open credit and who have lease financing arrangements
with us, causing us to incur bad debt charges, and, in the case
of financing arrangements, a loss of revenues. There can be no
assurance that additional losses will not occur in future
periods. Any future losses could harm our business and have a
material adverse effect on our operating results and financial
condition. Additionally, to the extent that the recent turmoil
in the credit markets makes it more difficult for customers to
obtain open credit or lease financing, those customers
ability to purchase our product could be adversely impacted,
which in turn could have a material adverse impact on our
financial condition and operating results.
The
market price for our common stock has fluctuated significantly
in the past and will likely continue to do so in the
future.
The market price for our common stock has experienced
substantial volatility in the past, and several factors could
cause the price to fluctuate substantially in the future. These
factors include but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in our operating results;
|
|
|
|
Variations between our operating results and either the guidance
we have furnished to the public or the published expectations of
securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
Economic developments in the storage and data management market
as a whole;
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in the valuation of companies perceived by
investors to be comparable to us;
|
|
|
|
Changes in analysts recommendations or projections;
|
|
|
|
Inquiries by the SEC, NASDAQ, law enforcement, or other
regulatory bodies;
|
|
|
|
International conflicts and acts of terrorism;
|
|
|
|
Announcements of new products, applications, or product
enhancements by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
Changes in our relationships with our suppliers, customers,
channel and strategic partners; and
|
|
|
|
General market conditions, including the recent financial and
credit crisis and global economic downturn.
|
In addition, the stock market has experienced volatility that
has particularly affected the market prices of the equity
securities of many technology companies. Certain macroeconomic
factors such as changes in interest rates, the market climate
for the technology sector, and levels of corporate spending on
IT, as well as variations in our expected operating performance,
could continue to have an impact on the trading price of our
stock. As a result, the
18
market price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in
the future, and any broad market decline may materially and
adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
If we
are unable to develop and introduce new products and respond to
technological change, if our new products do not achieve market
acceptance, if we fail to manage the transition between our new
and old products, or if we cannot provide the expected level of
service and support for our new products, our operating results
could be materially and adversely affected.
Our future growth depends upon the successful development and
introduction of new hardware and software products. Due to the
complexity of storage subsystems and storage security appliances
and the difficulty in gauging the engineering effort required to
produce new products, such products are subject to significant
technical risks. In addition, our new products must respond to
technological changes and evolving industry standards. If we are
unable, for technological or other reasons, to develop and
introduce new products in a timely manner in response to
changing market conditions or customer requirements, or if such
products do not achieve market acceptance, our operating results
could be materially and adversely affected. New or additional
product introductions increase the complexities of forecasting
revenues, and if not managed effectively, may adversely affect
our sales of existing products.
As new or enhanced products are introduced, we must successfully
manage the transition from older products in order to minimize
disruption in customers ordering patterns, avoid excessive
levels of older product inventories, and ensure that enough
supplies of new products can be delivered to meet
customers demands.
As we enter new or emerging markets, we will likely increase
demands on our service and support operations and may be exposed
to additional competition. We may not be able to provide
products, service and support to effectively compete for these
market opportunities.
An
increase in competition and industry consolidation could
materially and adversely affect our operating
results.
The storage markets are intensely competitive and are
characterized by rapidly changing technology. In the storage
market, our primary and near-line storage system products and
our associated software portfolio compete primarily with storage
system products and data management software from EMC, Hitachi
Data Systems, HP, IBM, and Sun Microsystems. In addition, Dell,
Inc. is a competitor in the storage marketplace through its
business arrangement with EMC, which allows Dell to resell EMC
storage hardware and software products, as well as through
Dells acquisition of EqualLogic, through which Dell offers
low-priced storage solutions. In the secondary storage market,
which includes the disk-to-disk backup, compliance and business
continuity segments, our solutions compete primarily against
products from EMC and Sun Microsystems. Our VTL products also
compete with traditional tape backup solutions in the broader
data backup/recovery space. Additionally, a number of small,
newer companies have recently entered the storage systems and
data management software markets, the near-line and VTL storage
markets and the high-performance clustered storage markets, some
of which may become significant competitors in the future.
There has been a trend toward industry consolidation in our
markets for several years. For example, in April 2009, Oracle
Corporation, one of our strategic partners, announced its plan
to acquire Sun Microsystems. We expect this trend to continue as
companies attempt to strengthen or hold their market positions
in an evolving industry and as companies are acquired or are
unable to continue operations. We believe that industry
consolidation may result in stronger competitors that are better
able to compete as sole-source vendors for customers. In
addition, current and potential competitors have established or
may establish cooperative relationships among themselves or with
third parties. Accordingly, it is possible that new competitors
or alliances among competitors may emerge and rapidly acquire
significant market share. We may not be able to compete
successfully against current or future competitors. Competitive
pressures we face could materially and adversely affect our
business and operating results.
19
Our
future financial performance depends on growth in the storage
and data management markets. If these markets do not perform as
we expect and upon which we calculate and forecast our revenues,
our operating results will be materially and adversely
impacted.
All of our products address the storage and data management
markets. Accordingly, our future financial performance will
depend in large part on continued growth in the storage and data
management markets and on our ability to adapt to emerging
standards in these markets. The markets for storage and data
management have been adversely impacted by the current global
economic downturn and may not grow as anticipated or may
continue to decline.
Additionally, emerging standards in these markets may adversely
affect the
UNIX®,
Windows®
and the World Wide Web server markets upon which we depend. For
example, we provide our open access data retention solutions to
customers within the financial services, healthcare,
pharmaceutical and government market segments, industries that
are subject to various evolving governmental regulations with
respect to data access, reliability and permanence (such as
Rule 17(a)(4) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended) in the United States and in the other countries in
which we operate. If our products do not meet and continue to
comply with these evolving governmental regulations in this
regard, customers in these market and geographical segments will
not purchase our products, and we will not be able to expand our
product offerings in these market and geographical segments at
the rates which we have forecasted.
Supply
chain issues, including financial problems of contract
manufacturers or component suppliers, or a shortage of adequate
component supply or manufacturing capacity that increase our
costs or cause a delay in our ability to fulfill orders, could
have a material adverse impact on our business and operating
results, and our failure to estimate customer demand properly
may result in excess or obsolete component supply, which could
adversely affect our gross margins.
The fact that we do not own or operate our manufacturing
facilities and supply chain exposes us to risks, including
reduced control over quality assurance, production costs and
product supply, which could have a material adverse impact on
the supply of our products and on our business and operating
results.
Financial problems of either contract manufacturers or component
suppliers could limit supply, increase costs, or result in
accelerated payment terms. The loss of any contract manufacturer
or key supplier could negatively impact our ability to
manufacture and sell our products. Qualifying a new contract
manufacturer and commencing volume production is expensive and
time-consuming. If we are required to change contract
manufacturers, we may lose revenue and damage our customer
relationships. Disruption or termination of manufacturing
capacity or component supply could delay shipments of our
products and could materially and adversely affect our operating
results. Such delays could also damage relationships with
current and prospective customers and suppliers, and our
competitive position and reputation could be harmed.
A return to growth in the economy is likely to put greater
pressures on us, our contract manufacturers and our suppliers to
accurately project demand and to establish optimal purchase
commitment levels. Additionally, the reservation of
manufacturing capacity at our contract manufacturers by other
companies, inside or outside of our industry, or the inability
by us to appropriately cancel, reschedule, or adjust our
manufacturing or components requirements based upon business
needs could result in either limitation of supply or increased
costs from these suppliers.
If we inaccurately forecast demand for our products or if there
is lack of demand for our products, we may have excess or
inadequate inventory or incur cancellation charges or penalties,
which would increase our costs and have an adverse impact on our
gross margins.
We rely on a limited number of suppliers for components such as
disk drives, computer boards and microprocessors utilized in the
assembly of our products. In recent years, rapid industry
consolidation has led to fewer component suppliers, which has
and could subject us to future periodic supply constraints and
price rigidity.
Furthermore, as a result of binding price or purchase
commitments with suppliers, we may be obligated to purchase
components at prices that are higher than those available in the
current market, or in amounts greater than
20
our needs. In the event that we become committed to purchase
components at prices in excess of the current market price when
the components are actually used, or are committed to buy
components in amounts greater than our needs, our gross margins
could decrease.
Component quality is a risk and is particularly significant with
respect to our suppliers of disk drives. In order to meet
product performance requirements, we must obtain disk drives of
extremely high quality and capacity.
As suppliers upgrade their components, they regularly end
of life older components. As we become aware of an end of
life situation, we attempt to make purchases or purchase
commitments to cover all future requirements or find a suitable
substitute component. We may not be able to obtain a sufficient
supply of components on a timely and cost effective basis. Our
failure to do so may lead to an adverse impact on our business.
On the other hand, if we fail to anticipate customer demand
properly or if there is reduced demand or no demand for our
products, an oversupply of end of life components could result
in excess or obsolete components that could adversely affect our
gross margins.
We intend to regularly introduce new products and product
enhancements, which will require us to rapidly achieve volume
production by coordinating with our contract manufacturers and
suppliers. We may need to increase our material purchases,
contract manufacturing capacity and quality functions to meet
anticipated demand. The inability of our contract manufacturers
or our component suppliers to provide us with adequate supplies
of high-quality products and materials suitable for our needs
could cause a delay in our ability to fulfill orders.
Our
acquisitions may not provide the anticipated benefits and may
disrupt our existing business.
As part of our strategy, we are continuously evaluating
opportunities to buy other businesses or technologies that would
complement our current products, expand the breadth of our
markets, or enhance our technical capabilities. On May 20,
2009, we announced that we have entered into a definitive
agreement to acquire Data Domain, Inc. (Data
Domain). We subsequently amended the terms of the
definitive agreement on June 3, 2009.
The success of this and any future acquisition is impacted by a
number of factors, and may be subject to the following risks:
|
|
|
|
|
The inability to successfully integrate the operations,
technologies, products and personnel of the acquired companies;
|
|
|
|
The diversion of managements attention from normal daily
operations of the business;
|
|
|
|
The loss of key employees; and
|
|
|
|
Substantial transaction costs and accounting charges.
|
|
|
|
Exposure to litigation related to acquisitions. For example, see
the lawsuit related to Data Domain described in Part I,
Item 3 Legal Proceedings below.
|
This and any future acquisitions may also result in risks to our
existing business, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution of our current stockholders percentage ownership
to the extent we issue new equity;
|
|
|
|
Assumption of additional liabilities;
|
|
|
|
Incurrence of additional debt or a decline in available cash;
adverse effects to our financial statements, such as the need to
make large and immediate write-offs or the incurrence of
restructuring and other related expenses;
|
|
|
|
Liability for intellectual property infringement and other
litigation claims, which we may or may not be aware of at the
time of acquisition; and
|
|
|
|
Creation of goodwill or other intangible assets that could
result in significant future amortization expense or impairment
charges.
|
In addition, failure to complete the Data Domain acquisition as
planned could negatively impact our stock price.
The failure to achieve the anticipated benefits of an
acquisition may also result in impairment charges for goodwill
or acquired intangibles. For example, in fiscal 2009 we
announced our decision to cease the development
21
and availability of our SMOS product, which was originally
acquired through our acquisition of Topio, Inc.
(Topio) in fiscal 2007, resulting in the impairment
of acquired intangibles related to such acquisition. Additional
or realized risks of this nature could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
The occurrence of any of the above risks could seriously harm
our business.
We are
exposed to fluctuations in the market values of our portfolio
investments and in interest rates; impairment of our investments
could harm our financial results.
At April 24, 2009, we had $2.6 billion in cash, cash
equivalents, available-for-sale securities and restricted cash
and investments. We invest our cash in a variety of financial
instruments, consisting principally of investments in
U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. government agency
bonds, corporate bonds, corporate securities, auction rate
securities, certificates of deposit, and money market funds,
including the Primary Fund. These investments are subject to
general credit, liquidity, market and interest rate risks, which
have been exacerbated by unusual events such as the financial
and credit crisis, and bankruptcy filings in the United States
which have affected various sectors of the financial markets and
led to global credit and liquidity issues. These securities are
generally classified as available-for-sale and,
consequently, are recorded on our consolidated balance sheets at
fair value with unrealized gains or losses reported as a
component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net
of tax.
Investments in both fixed rate and floating rate interest
earning instruments carry a degree of interest rate risk. Fixed
rate debt securities may have their market value adversely
impacted due to a rise in interest rates, while floating rate
securities may produce less income than expected if interest
rates fall. Due in part to these factors, our future investment
income may fall short of expectations due to changes in interest
rates. Currently, we do not use derivative financial instruments
in our investment portfolio. We may suffer losses if forced to
sell securities that have experienced a decline in market value
because of changes in interest rates. Currently, we do not use
financial derivatives to hedge our interest rate exposure.
The fair value of our investments may change significantly due
to events and conditions in the credit and capital markets.
These securities/issuers could be subject to review for possible
downgrade. Any downgrade in these credit ratings may result in
an additional decline in the estimated fair value of our
investments. Changes in the various assumptions used to value
these securities and any increase in the markets perceived
risk associated with such investments may also result in a
decline in estimated fair value. If such investments suffer
market price declines, as we experienced with some of our
investments during fiscal 2009, we may recognize in earnings the
decline in the fair value of our investments below their cost
basis when the decline is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
As a result of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers, which
occurred during fiscal 2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $11.8 million on our corporate bonds
related to investments in Lehman Brothers securities and
approximately $9.3 million on our investments in the
Primary Fund that held Lehman Brothers investments. As of
April 24, 2009, we have an investment in the Primary Fund,
an AAA-rated money market fund at the time of purchase, with a
par value of $60.9 million and an estimated fair value of
$51.6 million, which suspended redemptions in September
2008 and is in the process of liquidating its portfolio of
investments. We received total distributions of
$546.3 million during fiscal 2009 from the Primary Fund. On
December 3, 2008, it announced a plan for liquidation and
distribution of assets that includes the establishment of a
special reserve to be set aside out of its assets for pending or
threatened claims, as well as anticipated costs and expenses,
including related legal and accounting fees. On
February 26, 2009, the Primary Fund announced a plan to set
aside $3.5 billion of the funds remaining assets as
the special reserve which may be increased or
decreased as further information becomes available. The Primary
Fund has received an SEC order providing that the SEC will
supervise the distribution of assets from the Primary Fund. Our
pro rata share of the $3.5 billion special reserve is
approximately $41.5 million. The Primary Fund plans to
continue to make periodic distributions, up to the amount of the
special reserve, on a pro-rata basis. We could realize
additional losses in our holdings of the Primary Fund and may
not receive all or a portion of our remaining balance in the
Primary Fund as a result of market conditions and ongoing
litigation against the fund.
22
If the conditions in the credit and capital markets continue to
worsen, our investment portfolio may be impacted and we could
determine that more of our investments have experienced an
other-than-temporary decline in fair value, requiring further
impairments, which could adversely impact our financial position
and operating results.
Funds
associated with certain of our auction rate securities may not
be accessible for more than 12 months and our auction rate
securities may experience further other-than-temporary declines
in value, which would adversely affect our
earnings.
Auction rate securities (ARS) held by us are
securities with long-term nominal maturities, which, in
accordance with investment policy guidelines, had credit ratings
of AAA and Aaa at time of purchase. Interest rates for ARS are
reset through a Dutch auction each month, which
prior to February 2008 had provided a liquid market for these
securities.
Substantially all of our ARS are backed by pools of student
loans guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education, and
we believe the credit quality of these securities is high based
on this guarantee. However liquidity issues in the global credit
markets resulted in the failure of auctions for certain of our
ARS investments, with a par value of $73.3 million at
April 24, 2009. For each failed auction, the interest rate
resets to a maximum rate defined for each security, and the ARS
continue to pay interest in accordance with their terms,
although the principal associated with the ARS will not be
accessible until there is a successful auction or such time as
other markets for ARS investments develop.
As of April 24, 2009, we determined there was a total
decline in the fair value of our ARS investments of
approximately $8.8 million, of which we recorded temporary
impairment charges of $7.0 million, offset by unrealized
gains of $0.3 million, and $2.1 million was recognized
as an other-than-temporary impairment charge. In addition, we
have classified all of our auction rate securities as long-term
assets in our consolidated balance sheets of April 24, 2009
as our ability to liquidate such securities in the next
12 months is uncertain. Although we currently have the
ability and intent to hold these ARS investments until recovery
in market value or until maturity, if the current market
conditions deteriorate further, or the anticipated recovery in
market liquidity does not occur, we may be required to record
additional impairment charges in future quarters.
Our
leverage and debt service obligations may adversely affect our
financial condition and results of operations.
As a result of our sale of $1.265 billion of 1.75%
convertible senior notes in June 2008 (the Notes),
we have a greater amount of long-term debt than we have
maintained in the past. We also have a credit facility and
various synthetic lease arrangements. In addition, subject to
the restrictions in our existing and any future financings
agreements, we may incur additional debt.
Our maintenance of higher levels of indebtedness could have
adverse consequences including:
|
|
|
|
|
Adversely affecting our ability to satisfy our obligations;
|
|
|
|
Increasing the portion of our cash flows from operations may
have to be dedicated to interest and principal payments and may
not be available for operations, working capital, capital
expenditures, expansion, acquisitions or general corporate or
other purposes;
|
|
|
|
Impairing our ability to obtain additional financing in the
future;
|
|
|
|
Limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to,
changes in our business and industry; and
|
|
|
|
Making us more vulnerable to downturns in our business, our
industry or the economy in general.
|
Our ability to meet our expenses and debt obligations will
depend on our future performance, which will be affected by
financial, business, economic, regulatory and other factors. We
will not be able to control many of these factors, such as
economic conditions and governmental regulations. Furthermore,
our operations may not generate sufficient cash flows from
operations to enable us to meet our expenses and service our
debt. As a result, we may be required to repatriate funds from
our foreign subsidiaries, which could result in a significant
tax liability to us. If we are unable to generate sufficient
cash flows from operations, or if we are unable to repatriate
sufficient or any funds from our foreign subsidiaries, in order
to meet our expenses and debt service obligations, we may need
to utilize our existing line of credit to obtain the necessary
funds, or we may be required to raise additional funds. If we
determine it is necessary to seek additional funding for any
reason, we may not be able to obtain such funding or, if funding
is
23
available, obtain it on acceptable terms. If we fail to make a
payment on our debt, we could be in default on such debt, and
this default could cause us to be in default on our other
outstanding indebtedness.
We are
subject to restrictive and financial covenants in our credit
facility and synthetic lease arrangements. The restrictive
covenants may restrict our ability to operate our
business.
Our access to undrawn amounts under our credit facility and the
ongoing extension of credit under our synthetic lease
arrangements are subject to continued compliance with financial
covenants, which could be more challenging in a difficult
operating environment. If we do not comply with these
restrictive and financial covenants or otherwise default under
the facility or arrangements, we may be required to repay any
outstanding amounts under this credit facility or repurchase the
properties and facility which are subject to the synthetic lease
arrangements. If we lose access to these credit facility and
synthetic lease arrangements, we may not be able to obtain
alternative financing on acceptable terms, which could limit our
operating flexibility.
The agreements governing our credit facility and synthetic lease
arrangements contain restrictive covenants that limit our
ability to operate our business, including restrictions on our
ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
Incur indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
Incur indebtedness at the subsidiary level;
|
|
|
|
Grant liens;
|
|
|
|
Sell all or substantially all our assets:
|
|
|
|
Enter into certain mergers;
|
|
|
|
Change our business;
|
|
|
|
Enter into swap agreements;
|
|
|
|
Enter into transactions with our affiliates; and
|
|
|
|
Enter into certain restrictive agreements.
|
As a result of these restrictive covenants, our ability to
respond to changes in business and economic conditions and to
obtain additional financing, if needed, may be significantly
restricted. We may also be prevented from engaging in
transactions that might otherwise be beneficial to us, such as
strategic acquisitions or joint ventures.
We are also required to comply with financial covenants under
our credit facility and synthetic lease arrangements, and our
ability to comply with these financial covenants is dependent on
our future performance, which will be subject to many factors,
some of which are beyond our control, including prevailing
economic conditions.
Our failure to comply with the restrictive and financial
covenants could result in a default under our credit facility
and our synthetic lease arrangements, which would give the
counterparties thereto the ability to exercise certain rights,
including the right to accelerate the amounts owed thereunder
and to terminate the arrangement, and could also result in a
cross default with respect to our other indebtedness. In
addition, our failure to comply with these covenants and the
acceleration of amounts owed under our credit facility and
synthetic lease arrangements could result in a default under the
Notes, which could permit the holders to accelerate the Notes.
If all of our debt is accelerated, we may not have sufficient
funds available to repay such debt.
Future
issuances of common stock and hedging activities by holders of
the Notes may depress the trading price of our common stock and
the Notes.
Any new issuance of equity securities, including the issuance of
shares upon conversion of the Notes, could dilute the interests
of our existing stockholders, including holders who receive
shares upon conversion of their Notes, and could substantially
decrease the trading price of our common stock and the Notes. We
may issue equity securities in the future for a number of
reasons, including to finance our operations and business
strategy (including in connection with acquisitions, strategic
collaborations or other transactions), to increase our capital,
to adjust our
24
ratio of debt to equity, to satisfy our obligations upon the
exercise of outstanding warrants or options, or for other
reasons.
In addition, the price of our common stock could also be
affected by possible sales of our common stock by investors who
view the Notes as a more attractive means of equity
participation in our company and by hedging or arbitrage trading
activity that we expect to develop involving our common stock by
holders of the Notes. The hedging or arbitrage could, in turn,
affect the trading price of the Notes, or any common stock that
holders receive upon conversion of the Notes.
Conversion
of our Notes will dilute the ownership interest of existing
stockholders.
The conversion of some or all of our outstanding Notes will
dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders to the
extent we deliver common stock upon conversion of the Notes.
Upon conversion of a Note, we will satisfy our conversion
obligation by delivering cash for the principal amount of the
Note and shares of common stock, if any, to the extent the
conversion value exceeds the principal amount. There would be no
adjustment to the numerator in the net income per common share
computation for the cash settled portion of the Notes as that
portion of the debt instrument will always be settled in cash.
The number of shares delivered upon conversion, if any, will be
included in the denominator for the computation of diluted net
income per common share. Any sales in the public market of any
common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely
affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. In
addition, the existence of the Notes may encourage short selling
by market participants because the conversion of the Notes could
be used to satisfy short positions, or anticipated conversion of
the Notes into shares of our common stock could depress the
price of our common stock.
The
note hedges and warrant transactions that we entered into in
connection with the sale of the Notes may affect the trading
price of our common stock.
In connection with the issuance of the Notes, we entered into
privately negotiated convertible note hedge transactions with
certain option counterparties (the Counterparties),
which are expected to reduce the potential dilution to our
common stock upon any conversion of the Notes. At the same time,
we also entered into warrant transactions with the
Counterparties pursuant to which we may issue shares of our
common stock above a certain strike price. In connection with
these hedging transactions, the Counterparties may have entered
into various over-the-counter derivative transactions with
respect to our common stock or purchased shares of our common
stock in secondary market transactions at or following the
pricing of the Notes. Such activities may have had the effect of
increasing the price of our common stock. The Counterparties are
likely to modify their hedge positions from time to time prior
to conversion or maturity of the Notes by purchasing and selling
shares of our common stock or entering into other derivative
transactions. Additionally, these transactions may expose us to
counterparty credit risk for nonperformance. We manage our
exposure to counterparty credit risk through specific minimum
credit standards and the diversification of counterparties. The
effect, if any, of any of these transactions and activities on
the market price of our common stock or the Notes will depend,
in part, on market conditions and cannot be ascertained at this
time, but any of these activities could adversely affect the
value of our common stock. In addition, if our stock price
exceeds the strike price for the warrants, there could be
additional dilution to our shareholders, which could adversely
affect the value of our common stock.
Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives, Inc. (Lehman OTC)
is the counterparty to 20% of our Note hedges. The bankruptcy
filing by Lehman OTC on October 3, 2008 constituted an
event of default under the hedge transaction that
could, at our option, lead to termination under the hedge
transaction to the extent we provide notice to Lehman OTC.
We have not terminated the Note hedge transaction with Lehman
OTC, and will continue to carefully monitor the developments
impacting Lehman OTC. This event of default is not
expected to have an impact on our financial position or results
of operations. However, we could incur significant costs if we
elect to replace this hedge transaction originally held with
Lehman OTC. If we do not elect to replace this hedge
transaction, then we would be subject to potential dilution upon
conversion of the Notes if on the date of conversion the
per-share market price of our common stock exceeds the
conversion price of $31.85. The terms of the Notes, the rights
of the holders of the Notes and other counterparties to Note
hedges and warrants were not affected by the bankruptcy filings
of Lehman OTC.
25
Our
synthetic leases are off-balance sheet arrangements that could
negatively affect our financial condition and results. We have
invested substantial resources in new facilities and physical
infrastructure, which will increase our fixed costs. Our
operating results could be harmed if our business does not grow
proportionately to our increase in fixed costs.
We have various synthetic lease arrangements with BNP Paribas
Leasing Corporation as lessor (BBPPLC) for our
headquarters office buildings and land in Sunnyvale, California.
On April 1, 2009, we terminated two of the synthetic lease
arrangements in an effort to manage our capital structure in
light of the current economic environment. The lease payments
commitments associated with the remaining arrangements as of the
termination date totaled $141.1 million through fiscal
2013. These synthetic leases qualify for operating lease
accounting treatment under SFAS No. 13,
Accounting for Leases (as amended), and are not
considered variable interest entities under
FIN No. 46R Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities (revised). Therefore, we do not include the
properties or the associated debt on our condensed consolidated
balance sheet. However, if circumstances were to change
regarding our or BNPPLCs ownership of the properties, or
in BNPPLCs overall portfolio, we could be required to
consolidate the entity, the leased facilities and the associated
debt.
Our future minimum lease payments under these synthetic leases
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes
in our business by restricting the funds available for use in
addressing such changes. If we are unable to grow our business
and revenues proportionately to our increase in fixed costs, our
operating results will be harmed. If we elect not to purchase
the properties at the end of the lease term, we have guaranteed
a minimum residual value to BNPPLC. Therefore, if the fair value
of the properties declines below that guaranteed minimum
residual value, our residual value guarantee would require us to
pay the difference to BNPPLC, which could have a material
adverse effect on our cash flows, financial condition and
operating results.
Reductions in headcount growth have resulted in excess capacity
and vacant facilities. In addition, we may experience changes in
our operations in the future that could result in additional
excess capacity and vacant facilities. We will continue to be
responsible for all carrying costs of these facilities
operating leases until such time as we can sublease these
facilities or terminate the applicable leases based on the
contractual terms of the operating lease agreements, and these
costs may have an adverse effect on our business, operating
results and financial condition.
Risks
inherent in our international operations could have a material
adverse effect on our operating results.
We conduct a significant portion of our business outside the
United States. A substantial portion of our revenues is derived
from sales outside of the U.S. During fiscal 2009 and 2008,
our international revenues accounted for 48.5% and 47.1% of our
total revenues, respectively. In addition, we have several
research and development centers overseas, and a substantial
portion of our products are manufactured outside of the
U.S. Accordingly, our business and our future operating
results could be materially and adversely affected by a variety
of factors affecting our international operations, some of which
are beyond our control, including regulatory, political, or
economic conditions in a specific country or region, trade
protection measures and other regulatory requirements,
government spending patterns, and acts of terrorism and
international conflicts. In addition, we may not be able to
maintain or increase international market demand for our
products.
We face exposure to adverse movements in foreign currency
exchange rates as a result of our international operations.
These exposures may change over time as business practices
evolve, and they could have a material adverse impact on our
financial results and cash flows. Our international sales are
denominated in U.S. dollars and in foreign currencies. An
increase in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to
foreign currencies could make our products more expensive and
therefore potentially less competitive in foreign markets.
Conversely, lowering our price in local currency may result in
lower
U.S.-based
revenue. A decrease in the value of the U.S. dollar
relative to foreign currencies could increase the cost of local
operating expenses. Additionally, we have exposures to emerging
market currencies, which can have extreme currency volatility.
We utilize forward and option contracts to hedge our foreign
currency exposure associated with certain assets and liabilities
as well as anticipated foreign currency cash flows. All balance
sheet hedges are marked to market through earnings every
quarter. The time-value component of our cash flow hedges is
recorded in earnings while all other gains and losses are marked
to market through other comprehensive income until forecasted
transactions occur, at which time such realized gains and losses
are recognized in earnings.
26
These hedges attempt to reduce, but do not always entirely
eliminate, the impact of currency exchange movements. Factors
that could have an impact on the effectiveness of our hedging
program include the accuracy of forecasts and the volatility of
foreign currency markets as well as widening interest rate
differentials and the volatility of the foreign exchange market.
There can be no assurance that such hedging strategies will be
successful and that currency exchange rate fluctuations will not
have a material adverse effect on our operating results.
Additional risks inherent in our international business
activities generally include, among others, longer accounts
receivable payment cycles and difficulties in managing
international operations. Such factors could materially and
adversely affect our future international sales and consequently
our operating results. Our international operations are subject
to other risks, including general import/export restrictions and
the potential loss of proprietary information due to piracy,
misappropriation or laws that may be less protective of our
intellectual property rights than U.S. law.
Moreover, in many foreign countries, particularly in those with
developing economies, it is common to engage in business
practices that are prohibited by regulations applicable to us,
such as the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Although we implement
policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with these
laws, our employees, contractors and agents, as well as those
companies to which we outsource certain of our business
operations, may take actions in violation of our policies. Any
such violation, even if prohibited by our policies, could
subject us to fines and other penalties, which could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or
results of operations.
We
have credit exposure to our hedging
counterparties.
In order to minimize volatility in earnings associated with
fluctuations in the value of foreign currency relative to the
U.S. Dollar, we utilize forward and option contracts to
hedge our exposure to foreign currencies. As a result of
entering into these hedging contracts with major financial
institutions, we may be subject to counterparty nonperformance
risk. Should there be a counterparty default, we could be
exposed to the net losses on the original hedge contracts or be
unable to recover anticipated net gains from the transactions.
A
significant portion of our cash and cash equivalents balances is
held overseas. If we are not able to generate sufficient cash
domestically in order to fund our U.S. operations and strategic
opportunities and service our debt, we may incur a significant
tax liability in order to repatriate the overseas cash balances,
or we may need to raise additional capital in the
future.
A portion of our earnings which is generated from our
international operations is held and invested by certain of our
foreign subsidiaries. These amounts are not freely available for
dividend repatriation to the United States without triggering
significant adverse tax consequences, which could adversely
affect our financial results. As a result, unless the cash
generated by our domestic operations is sufficient to fund our
domestic operations, our broader corporate initiatives such as
stock repurchases, acquisitions, and other strategic
opportunities, and to service our outstanding indebtedness, we
may need to raise additional funds through public or private
debt or equity financings, or we may need to expand our existing
credit facility to the extent we choose not to repatriate our
overseas cash. Such additional financing may not be available on
terms favorable to us, or at all, and any new equity financings
or offerings would dilute our current stockholders
ownership. Furthermore, lenders, particularly in light of the
current challenges in the credit markets, may not agree to
extend us new, additional or continuing credit. If adequate
funds are not available, or are not available on acceptable
terms, we may be forced to repatriate our foreign cash and incur
a significant tax expense or we may not be able to take
advantage of strategic opportunities, develop new products,
respond to competitive pressures or repay our outstanding
indebtedness. In any such case, our business, operating results
or financial condition could be materially adversely affected.
27
Changes
in our effective tax rate or adverse outcomes resulting from
examination of our income tax returns could adversely affect our
results.
Our effective tax rate could be adversely affected by several
factors, many of which are outside of our control, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings being lower than anticipated in countries where we are
taxed at lower rates as compared to the U.S. statutory tax
rate;
|
|
|
|
Material differences between forecasted and actual tax rates as
a result of a shift in the mix of pretax profits and losses by
tax jurisdiction, our ability to use tax credits, or effective
tax rates by tax jurisdiction that differ from our estimates;
|
|
|
|
Changing tax laws or related interpretations, accounting
standards, regulations, and interpretations in multiple tax
jurisdictions in which we operate, as well as the requirements
of certain tax rulings;
|
|
|
|
An increase in expenses not deductible for tax purposes,
including certain stock-based compensation expense, write-offs
of acquired in-process research and development, and impairment
of goodwill;
|
|
|
|
The tax effects of purchase accounting for acquisitions and
restructuring charges that may cause fluctuations between
reporting periods;
|
|
|
|
Changes related to our ability to ultimately realize future
benefits attributed to our deferred tax assets, including those
related to other-than-temporary impairments;
|
|
|
|
Tax assessments resulting from income tax audits or any related
tax interest or penalties could significantly affect our income
tax expense for the period in which the settlements take
place; and
|
|
|
|
A change in our decision to indefinitely reinvest foreign
earnings.
|
We receive significant tax benefits from sales to our
non-U.S. customers.
These benefits are contingent upon existing tax regulations in
the United States and in the countries in which our
international operations are located. Future changes in domestic
or international tax regulations could adversely affect our
ability to continue to realize these tax benefits. We have not
provided for United States federal and state income taxes or
foreign withholding taxes that may result on future remittances
of undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries. The Obama
administration recently announced several proposals to reform
United States tax rules, including proposals that may result in
a reduction or elimination of the deferral of United States
income tax on our future unrepatriated earnings. Absent a
restructuring of some legal entities and their functionality,
some of the future unrepatriated earnings would be taxed at the
United States federal income tax rate.
Additionally, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit on May 27, 2009 held in Xilinx Inc. v.
Commissioner that stock-based compensation must be included in
the research and development cost base of companies that have
entered into a cost sharing arrangement and must, therefore, be
allocated among the participants based on anticipated benefits.
The Courts reversal of the prior U.S. Tax Court
decision will impact our estimate of tax benefits that were
required to be recognized under Financial Interpretation
No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes-an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109
(FIN 48). We are currently evaluating the
impact of the Xilinx case on our provision for income taxes for
the first quarter of fiscal 2010, but expect any final
adjustment will be limited to a reduction of our unrecognized
tax attributes.
Our international operations currently benefit from a tax ruling
concluded in the Netherlands, which expires in 2010. If we are
unable to negotiate a similar tax ruling upon expiration of the
current ruling, our effective tax rate could increase and our
operating results could be adversely affected. Our effective tax
rate could also be adversely affected by different and evolving
interpretations of existing law or regulations, which in turn
would negatively impact our operating and financial results as a
whole. Our effective tax rate could also be adversely affected
if there is a change in international operations and how the
operations are managed and structured. The price of our common
stock could decline to the extent that our financial results are
materially affected by an adverse change in our effective tax
rate.
28
We are currently undergoing federal income tax audits in the
United States and several foreign tax jurisdictions. The rights
to some of our intellectual property (IP) are owned
by certain of our foreign subsidiaries, and payments are made
between U.S. and foreign tax jurisdictions relating to the
use of this IP in a qualified cost sharing arrangement. In
recent years, several other U.S. companies have had their
foreign IP arrangements challenged as part of IRS examinations,
which has resulted in material proposed assessments
and/or
pending litigation with respect to those companies. During
fiscal 2009, we received Notices of Proposed Adjustments from
the IRS in connection with federal income tax audits conducted
with respect to our fiscal 2003 and 2004 tax years. If the
ultimate determination of income taxes assessed under the
current IRS audit or under audits being conducted in any of the
other tax jurisdictions in which we operate results in an amount
in excess of the tax provision we have recorded or reserved for,
our operating results, cash flows and financial condition could
be adversely affected.
We may
face increased risks and uncertainties related to our current or
future investments in nonmarketable securities of private
companies, and these investments may not achieve our
objectives.
On occasion, we make strategic investments in nonmarketable
securities of development stage entities. As of April 24,
2009, the carrying value of our investments in nonmarketable
securities totaled $4.0 million. Investments in
nonmarketable securities are inherently risky, and some of these
companies are likely to fail. Their success (or lack thereof) is
dependent on product development, market acceptance, operational
efficiency and other key business success factors. In addition,
depending on these companies future prospects, they may
not be able to raise additional funds when needed, or they may
receive lower valuations, with less favorable investment terms
than in previous financings, and our investments in them would
likely become impaired. We could lose our entire investment in
these companies. For example, during fiscal 2009 we determined
that our investments in nonmarketable securities of two
companies had been impaired, and we recorded impairment charges
of $6.3 million.
If we
are unable to establish fair value for any undelivered element
of a sales arrangement, all or a portion of the revenue relating
to the arrangement could be deferred to future
periods.
In the course of our sales efforts, we often enter into multiple
element arrangements that include our systems and one or more of
the following undelivered software-related elements: software
entitlements and maintenance, premium hardware maintenance, and
storage review services. If we are required to change the
pricing of our software related elements through discounting, or
otherwise introduce variability in the pricing of such elements,
we may be unable to maintain Vendor Specific Objective Evidence
of fair value of the undelivered elements of the arrangement,
and would therefore be required to delay the recognition of all
or a portion of the related arrangement. A delay in the
recognition of revenue may cause fluctuations in our financial
results and may adversely affect our operating margins.
Our
business could be materially and adversely affected as a result
of a natural disaster, terrorist acts or other catastrophic
events.
We depend on the ability of our personnel, raw materials,
equipment and products to move reasonably unimpeded around the
world. Any political, military, world health or other issue that
hinders this movement or restricts the import or export of
materials could lead to significant business disruptions.
Furthermore, any strike, economic failure or other material
disruption caused by fire, floods, hurricanes, power loss, power
shortages, telecommunications failures, break-ins and similar
events could also adversely affect our ability to conduct
business. If such disruptions result in cancellations of
customer orders or contribute to a general decrease in economic
activity or corporate spending on information technology, or
directly impact our marketing, manufacturing, financial and
logistics functions, our results of operations and financial
condition could be materially adversely affected. In addition,
our headquarters are located in Northern California, an area
susceptible to earthquakes. If any significant disaster were to
occur, our ability to operate our business could be impaired.
We
depend on attracting and retaining qualified technical and sales
personnel. If we are unable to attract and retain such
personnel, our operating results could be materially and
adversely impacted.
Our continued success depends, in part, on our ability to
identify, attract, motivate and retain qualified technical and
sales personnel. Because our future success is dependent on our
ability to continue to enhance and introduce new products, we
are particularly dependent on our ability to identify, attract,
motivate and retain qualified engineers with the requisite
education, background and industry experience. Competition for
qualified
29
engineers, particularly in Silicon Valley, can be intense. The
loss of the services of a significant number of our engineers or
salespeople could be disruptive to our development efforts or
business relationships and could materially and adversely affect
our operating results.
Undetected
software errors, hardware errors, or failures found in new
products may result in loss of or delay in market acceptance of
our products, which could increase our costs and reduce our
revenues. Product quality problems could lead to reduced
revenue, gross margins and operating results.
Our products may contain undetected software errors, hardware
errors or failures when first introduced or as new versions are
released. Despite testing by us and by current and potential
customers, errors may not be found in new products until after
commencement of commercial shipments, resulting in loss of or
delay in market acceptance, which could materially and adversely
affect our operating results.
If we fail to remedy a product defect, we may experience a
failure of a product line, temporary or permanent withdrawal
from a product or market, damage to our reputation, inventory
costs or product reengineering expenses, any of which could have
a material impact on our revenue, gross margins and operating
results.
In addition, we may be subject to losses that may result from or
are alleged to result from defects in our products, which could
subject us to claims for damages, including consequential
damages. Based on our historical experience, we believe that the
risk of exposure to product liability claims is low. However,
should we experience increased exposure to product liability
claims, our business could be adversely impacted.
We are
exposed to various risks related to legal proceedings or claims
and protection of intellectual property rights, which could
adversely affect our operating results.
We are a party to lawsuits in the normal course of our business,
including our ongoing litigation with Sun Microsystems.
Litigation can be expensive, lengthy and disruptive to normal
business operations. Moreover, the results of complex legal
proceedings are difficult to predict. An unfavorable resolution
of a particular lawsuit could have a material adverse effect on
our business, operating results, or financial condition.
If we are unable to protect our intellectual property, we may be
subject to increased competition that could materially and
adversely affect our operating results. Our success depends
significantly upon our proprietary technology. We rely on a
combination of copyright and trademark laws, trade secrets,
confidentiality procedures, contractual provisions, and patents
to protect our proprietary rights. We seek to protect our
software, documentation and other written materials under trade
secret, copyright and patent laws, which afford only limited
protection. Some of our U.S. trademarks are registered
internationally as well. We will continue to evaluate the
registration of additional trademarks as appropriate. We
generally enter into confidentiality agreements with our
employees and with our resellers, strategic partners and
customers. We currently have multiple U.S. and
international patent applications pending and multiple
U.S. patents issued. The pending applications may not be
approved, and our existing and future patents may be challenged.
If such challenges are brought, the patents may be invalidated.
We may not be able to develop proprietary products or
technologies that are patentable, or where any issued patent
will provide us with any competitive advantages or will not be
challenged by third parties. Further, the patents of others may
materially and adversely affect our ability to do business. In
addition, a failure to obtain and defend our trademark
registrations may impede our marketing and branding efforts and
competitive position.
Litigation may be necessary to protect our proprietary
technology. Any such litigation may be time consuming and
costly. Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary rights,
unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects of our products
or obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary. In
addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect
proprietary rights to as great an extent as do the laws of the
United States. Our means of protecting our proprietary rights
may not be adequate or our competitors may independently develop
similar technology, duplicate our products, or design around
patents issued to us or other intellectual property rights of
ours.
We are subject to intellectual property infringement claims. We
may, from time to time, receive claims that we are infringing
third parties intellectual property rights. Third parties
may in the future claim infringement by us with respect to
current or future products, patents, trademarks or other
proprietary rights. We expect that companies in the network
storage market will increasingly be subject to infringement
claims as the number of products and
30
competitors in our industry segment grows and the functionality
of products in different industry segments overlaps. Any such
claims could be time consuming, result in costly litigation,
cause product shipment delays, require us to redesign our
products or enter into royalty or licensing agreements, any of
which could materially and adversely affect our operating
results. Such royalty or licensing agreements, if required, may
not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all.
We are
continually seeking ways to make our cost structure more
efficient, including moving activities from higher- to
lower-cost owned locations, as well as outsourcing certain
business process functions. Problems with the execution of these
changes could have an adverse effect on our business or results
of operations.
We continuously seek to make our cost structure more efficient.
We are focused on increasing workforce flexibility and
scalability, and improving overall competitiveness by leveraging
our global capabilities, as well as external talent and skills
worldwide. For example, certain engineering activities and
projects that were formally performed in the U.S. have been
moved to lower cost international locations. The challenges
involved with these initiatives include executing business
functions in accordance with local laws and other obligations
while maintaining adequate standards, controls and procedures.
In addition, we will rely on partners or third party service
providers for the provision of certain business process
functions in IT and accounting, and as a result, we may incur
increased business continuity risks. For example, we may no
longer be able to exercise control over some aspects of the
future development, support or maintenance of outsourced
operations and processes, including the internal controls
associated with those outsourced business operations and
processes, which could adversely affect our business. If we are
unable to effectively utilize or integrate and interoperate with
external resources or if our partners or third party service
providers experience business difficulties or are unable to
provide business process services as anticipated, we may need to
seek alternative service providers or resume providing these
business processes internally, which could be costly and time
consuming and have a material adverse effect on our operating
results.
Our
business could be materially adversely affected by changes in
regulations or standards regarding energy efficiency of our
products.
We continually seek ways to increase the energy efficiency of
our products. Recent analyses have estimated the amount of
global carbon emissions that are due to information technology
products. As a result, governmental and non-governmental
organizations have turned their attention to development of
regulations and standards to drive technological improvements
and reduce such amount of carbon emissions. There is a risk that
the rush to development of these standards will not fully
address the complexity of the technology developed by the IT
industry or will favor certain technological approaches.
Depending on the regulations or standards that are ultimately
adopted, compliance could adversely affect our business,
financial condition or operating results.
Our
business is subject to increasingly complex corporate
governance, public disclosure, accounting and tax requirements
that have increased both our costs and the risk of
noncompliance.
Because our common stock is publicly traded, we are subject to
certain rules and regulations of federal, state and financial
market exchange entities charged with the protection of
investors and the oversight of companies whose securities are
publicly traded. These entities, including the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board, the SEC, and NASDAQ, have
implemented requirements and regulations and continue developing
additional regulations and requirements in response to corporate
scandals and laws enacted by Congress, most notably the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Our efforts to comply with these
regulations have resulted in, and are likely to continue
resulting in, increased general and administrative expenses and
diversion of management time and attention from
revenue-generating activities to compliance activities.
We completed our evaluation of our internal controls over
financial reporting for the fiscal year ended April 24,
2009 as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. Although our assessment, testing and evaluation
resulted in our conclusion that as of April 24, 2009, our
internal controls over financial reporting were effective, we
cannot predict the outcome of our testing in future periods. If
our internal controls are ineffective in future periods, our
business and reputation could be harmed. We may incur additional
expenses and commitment of
31
managements time in connection with further evaluations,
either of which could materially increase our operating expenses
and accordingly reduce our operating results.
Because new and modified laws, regulations, and standards are
subject to varying interpretations in many cases due to their
lack of specificity, their application in practice may evolve
over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and
governing bodies. This evolution may result in continuing
uncertainty regarding compliance matters and additional costs
necessitated by ongoing revisions to our disclosure and
governance practices.
Changes
in financial accounting standards may cause adverse unexpected
fluctuations and affect our reported results of
operations.
A change in accounting standards or practices and varying
interpretations of existing accounting pronouncements, such as
the increased use of fair value measures and the potential
requirement that U.S. registrants prepare financial
statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting
Standards (IFRS), could have a significant effect on our
reported financial results or the way we conduct our business.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Our headquarters site for corporate general administration,
sales and marketing, research and development, global services,
and operations is located in Sunnyvale, California. We own
approximately 933,484 square feet of facilities at our
Sunnyvale headquarters, of which we occupy approximately
737,157 square feet. In addition, we own
646,123 square feet of facilities in Research Triangle Park
(RTP) , North Carolina, of which we occupy approximately
490,131 square feet, that is being used for research and
development, and global support.
In addition, we have commitments related to various lease
arrangements with BNP Paribas LLC (BNP) for
approximately 559,002 square feet of facilities at our
headquarters in Sunnyvale, California, of which we occupy
approximately 274,398 square feet (as further described
below under Contractual Cash Obligations and Other
Commercial Commitments in Item 7 and Note 15
under Item 8).
We lease other sales offices and research and development
facilities throughout the U.S. and internationally. We
expect that our existing facilities and those being developed in
Sunnyvale, California; RTP, North Carolina; and worldwide are
adequate for our requirements over at least the next two years
and that additional space will be available as needed.
See additional discussion regarding properties in
Note 15 under Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements and Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
On September 5, 2007, we filed a patent infringement
lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas seeking compensatory
damages and a permanent injunction against Sun Microsystems. On
October 25, 2007, Sun Microsystems filed a counter
claim against us in the Eastern District of Texas seeking
compensatory damages and a permanent injunction. On
October 29, 2007, Sun filed a second lawsuit against us in
the Northern District of California asserting additional patents
against us. The Texas court granted a joint motion to transfer
the Texas lawsuit to the Northern District of California on
November 26, 2007. On March 26, 2008, Sun filed a
third lawsuit in federal court that extends the patent
infringement charges to storage management technology we
acquired in January 2008. The three lawsuits are currently in
the discovery phase and no trial date has been set, so we are
unable at this time to determine the likely outcome of these
various patent litigations. Since we are unable to reasonably
estimate the amount or range of any potential settlement, no
accrual has been recorded as of April 24, 2009.
In April 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with the
United States of America, acting through the United States
Department of Justice (DOJ) and on behalf of the
General Services Administration (the GSA), under
which we agreed to pay the United States $128.0 million,
plus interest of $0.7 million, related to a dispute
regarding our discount practices and compliance with the price
reduction clause provisions of GSA contracts between August 1997
and February 2005 in consideration for the release of NetApp by
the DOJ and GSA with
32
respect to the claims alleged in the investigation as set forth
in the settlement agreement. The agreement reflects neither an
admission nor denial by us of any of the claims alleged by the
DOJ and represents a compromise to avoid continued litigation
and associated risks. We made the settlement payment on
April 27, 2009. We are currently in discussions with the
U.S. government to demonstrate that we have implemented
processes and procedures to ensure that we comply with federal
contracting rules.
On June 12, 2009, a purported class action lawsuit was
filed on behalf of Data Domain stockholders in the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware. The complaint names as
defendants the Data Domain directors, and NetApp and its merger
subs. The lawsuit alleges breach of fiduciary duty by the Data
Domain board and aiding and abetting that breach by NetApp. The
complaint seeks injunctive relief and damages. We believe that
the claims against it are without merit.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submissions
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
At a special meeting of stockholders held on April 21,
2009, the stockholders of the Company approved (i) a
one-time option exchange program pursuant to which employees of
the Company (excluding the Companys executive officers and
directors) who hold certain options to purchase shares of the
Companys common stock (such options, eligible
options) are being given the opportunity to exchange such
eligible options for restricted stock units and
(ii) certain amendments to the Companys 1999 Stock
Option Plan and other equity plans to facilitate the option
exchange program. The table below shows the number of votes cast
for and against such proposal and the number of votes withheld.
|
|
|
|
|
Voted For
|
|
Voted Against
|
|
Abstained
|
|
129,568,703
|
|
127,715,080
|
|
75,235
|
The option exchange program commenced on May 22, 2009 and
will expire on June 19, 2009, unless extended by the
Company. For more information, please see our definitive proxy
statement on Schedule 14A, as filed with the SEC on
March 23, 2009, and our tender offer statement on
Schedule TO, as filed with the SEC on May 22, 2009, as
may be amended from time to time.
33
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ Global Select
Market (and its predecessor, the Nasdaq National Market) on
November 21, 1995, and is traded under the symbol
NTAP. As of June 12, 2009 there were
952 holders of record of the common stock. The closing
price for our common stock on June 12, 2009 was $20.14. The
following table sets forth for the periods indicated the high
and low closing sale prices for our common stock as reported on
the NASDAQ Global Select Market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2009
|
|
|
Fiscal 2008
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
27.31
|
|
|
$
|
21.66
|
|
|
$
|
39.05
|
|
|
$
|
28.68
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
26.42
|
|
|
|
12.20
|
|
|
|
32.04
|
|
|
|
22.97
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
15.32
|
|
|
|
10.39
|
|
|
|
31.49
|
|
|
|
20.38
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
18.84
|
|
|
|
12.52
|
|
|
|
23.78
|
|
|
|
19.49
|
|
The following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative
total return on our common stock, the NASDAQ Composite Index and
the S&P 500 Information Technology Index from
April 30, 2004 through April 24, 2009. The past
performance of our common stock is no indication of future
performance.
COMPARISON
OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among NetApp, Inc., The NASDAQ Composite Index
And The S&P Information Technology Index
* $100 invested on
4/30/04 in
stock or index, including reinvestment of dividends.
Fiscal year ending April 30.
Copyright©
2009 S&P, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All
rights reserved.
|
|
|
* |
|
$100 invested on April 30, 2004 in stock or index-including
reinvestment of dividends. Fiscal year ending April 30. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4/04
|
|
|
4/05
|
|
|
4/06
|
|
|
4/07
|
|
|
4/08
|
|
|
4/09
|
NetApp., Inc.
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
143.31
|
|
|
|
|
199.19
|
|
|
|
|
199.95
|
|
|
|
|
130.04
|
|
|
|
|
98.33
|
|
NASDAQ Composite
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
100.90
|
|
|
|
|
124.20
|
|
|
|
|
136.38
|
|
|
|
|
130.63
|
|
|
|
|
91.41
|
|
S&P Information Technology
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
|
98.25
|
|
|
|
|
114.80
|
|
|
|
|
126.21
|
|
|
|
|
127.47
|
|
|
|
|
93.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
We believe that a number of factors may cause the market price
of our common stock to fluctuate significantly. See
Item 1A. Business Risk Factors.
Dividend
Policy
We have never paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We
currently anticipate retaining all available funds, if any, to
finance internal growth and product development as well as other
possible management initiatives, including stock repurchases and
acquisitions. Payment of dividends in the future will depend
upon our earnings and financial condition and such other factors
as the directors may consider or deem appropriate at the time.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation
Plans
Information regarding securities authorized for issuance under
equity compensation plans is incorporated by reference from our
Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
Unregistered
Securities Sold in Fiscal 2009
We did not sell any unregistered securities during fiscal 2009.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
The following table provides information as of April 24,
2009 with respect to the shares of common stock repurchased by
NetApp during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Maximum Dollar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of
|
|
|
That May Yet
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Publicly
|
|
|
be Purchased
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price Paid
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
Under
|
|
Period
|
|
Purchased(1)
|
|
|
per Share
|
|
|
Program(2)
|
|
|
the Program(2)
|
|
|
|
(Shares in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Shares in thousands)
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Period #1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(January 24, 2009 to February 20, 2009)
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
$
|
16.22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,096
|
|
Period #2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(February 21, 2009 to March 20, 2009)
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
14.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,096
|
|
Period #3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(March 21, 2009 to April 24, 2009)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
17.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,096
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
$
|
16.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Consists of shares repurchased to satisfy tax withholding
obligations that arose on the vesting of shares of restricted
stock units. |
|
(2) |
|
On May 13, 2003, we announced that our Board of Directors
had authorized a stock repurchase program. As of April 24,
2009, our Board of Directors had authorized the repurchase of up
to $4,023,638,730 of common stock under this program. On
August 13, 2008, our Board of Directors approved an
increase of $1,000,000 to the stock repurchase program. During
fiscal 2009, we repurchased 16,960 shares of our common
stock at a weighted-average price of $23.58, for an aggregate
purchase price of $399,981,855. As of April 24, 2009, we
had repurchased 104,325,286 shares of our common stock at a
weighted-average price of $28.06 per share for an aggregate
purchase price of $2,927,376,373 since inception of the stock
repurchase program, and the remaining authorized amount for
stock repurchases under this program was $1,096,262,357 with no
termination date. |
35
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
The data set forth below are qualified in their entirety by
reference to, and should be read in conjunction with,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and the Consolidated
Financial Statements and related notes thereto included in this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Five
Fiscal Years Ended April 24, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per-share amounts)
|
|
|
Net revenues(1)
|
|
$
|
3,406,393
|
|
|
$
|
3,303,167
|
|
|
$
|
2,804,282
|
|
|
$
|
2,066,456
|
|
|
$
|
1,598,131
|
|
Total cost of revenues
|
|
|
1,416,478
|
|
|
|
1,289,791
|
|
|
|
1,099,782
|
|
|
|
809,995
|
|
|
|
623,083
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
1,989,915
|
|
|
|
2,013,376
|
|
|
|
1,704,500
|
|
|
|
1,256,461
|
|
|
|
975,048
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
1,942,740
|
|
|
|
1,699,776
|
|
|
|
1,403,258
|
|
|
|
948,170
|
|
|
|
721,861
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
47,175
|
|
|
|
313,600
|
|
|
|
301,242
|
|
|
|
308,291
|
|
|
|
253,187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income(1)
|
|
$
|
86,545
|
|
|
$
|
309,738
|
|
|
$
|
297,735
|
|
|
$
|
266,452
|
|
|
$
|
225,754
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, basic
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.88
|
|
|
$
|
0.80
|
|
|
$
|
0.72
|
|
|
$
|
0.63
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share, diluted
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
$
|
0.69
|
|
|
$
|
0.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in basic net income per share calculation
|
|
|
330,279
|
|
|
|
351,676
|
|
|
|
371,204
|
|
|
|
371,061
|
|
|
|
361,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in diluted net income per share calculation
|
|
|
334,575
|
|
|
|
361,090
|
|
|
|
388,454
|
|
|
|
388,381
|
|
|
|
380,412
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
2,604,206
|
|
|
$
|
1,164,390
|
|
|
$
|
1,308,781
|
|
|
$
|
1,322,892
|
|
|
$
|
1,169,965
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
1,759,459
|
|
|
|
653,331
|
|
|
|
1,053,256
|
|
|
|
1,116,047
|
|
|
|
1,055,700
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
5,472,819
|
|
|
|
4,070,988
|
|
|
|
3,658,478
|
|
|
|
3,260,965
|
|
|
|
2,372,647
|
|
Short-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,110
|
|
|
|
166,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and other
|
|
|
1,429,499
|
|
|
|
318,658
|
|
|
|
9,487
|
|
|
|
138,200
|
|
|
|
4,474
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,662,346
|
|
|
|
1,700,339
|
|
|
|
1,989,021
|
|
|
|
1,923,453
|
|
|
|
1,660,804
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Net revenues and net income for fiscal 2009 included a GSA
settlement of $128,715. Net income for fiscal 2006 included an
income tax expense of $22,500 related to the American Jobs
Creation Act and the repatriation of foreign subsidiary earnings
back to the U.S. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion of our financial condition and results
of operations should be read together with the financial
statements and the related notes set forth under
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data. The following discussion also contains trend
information and other forward looking statements that involve a
number of risks and uncertainties. The Risk Factors set forth in
Item 1. Business are hereby incorporated into
the discussion by reference.
Overview
Fiscal 2009 was characterized initially by a slowdown in the
macroeconomic environment with continued deterioration in global
economic conditions as the year progressed. Customers were faced
with data volumes that continued to grow and shrinking or frozen
capital budgets. As a result, customers postponed many IT
projects and looked for solutions that provided a rapid return
on their investment typically less than twelve
months. Server virtualization remained one of the most often
funded IT projects, due to the cost savings it produces. NetApp
has been a direct beneficiary of the trend towards server
virtualization because of the unique storage efficiency features
36
we provide along with our ability to virtualize the storage
infrastructure. With our software intensive solutions, we offer
customers greater functionality, easier manageability and a
smaller hardware footprint, helping them to meet their business
objectives with less physical storage and a lower total cost of
ownership. As a result, NetApp gained a significant number of
new customer accounts in fiscal 2009.
However, revenue from new accounts was not enough to offset the
slowdown in spending from many of our largest accounts, and our
overall revenue growth slowed relative to previous years. Our
largest accounts contributed to a significant level of hardware
service contract and software entitlement and maintenance
contract renewals, demonstrating continued commitment to NetApp
technology in their data centers while at the same time delaying
capital expenditures amidst an uncertain economic environment.
Net revenues increased by 3.1% to $3,406.4 million in
fiscal 2009, from $3,303.2 million in fiscal 2008. The
increase in our net revenues for fiscal 2009 was due to
increases in software entitlements and maintenance revenues as
well as service revenues, partially offset by decreases in
product revenues and a negative impact from a GSA settlement.
The $128.7 million GSA settlement was related to a dispute
regarding our discount practices and compliance with the price
reduction clause provisions of a GSA contract between August
1997 and February 2005.
NetApp implemented comprehensive expense reduction programs in
fiscal 2009 as the global macroeconomic conditions worsened. We
decided to cease development and availability of our
SnapMirror®
for Open Systems (SMOS) product. We also implemented
a worldwide restructuring program which included a reduction in
workforce, the closing or downsizing of certain facilities, and
the establishment of a plan to outsource certain internal
activities. As a result of these programs, we recognized total
restructuring charges of $51.5 million, including the
severance costs related to the elimination of approximately 450
regular positions, contract cancellation charges, write offs of
intangible and fixed assets and costs association with the
closure of some of our facilities; as well as $2.9 million
of other charges to support our restructuring initiatives. Our
actions were intended to better align our cost structure with
expected revenues, as well as to reallocate resources into areas
of our business with more growth potential.
As a result of the financial crisis during fiscal 2009, we
recorded an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $29.6 million on our investments which
resulted from direct and indirect exposure to Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. securities and
other-than-temporary
declines in the value of our auction rate securities and
investments in privately held companies. The volatility in the
financial markets and economic uncertainty has had and may
continue to have an adverse impact on our business and financial
condition in ways that we currently cannot predict.
Despite the current challenging economic environment, we believe
there are fundamental aspects of our business that will allow us
to succeed over the long term. We believe that our products and
services provide customers with valuable storage solutions, even
in a more constrained spending environment. We also believe that
our investments in branding, awareness and new customer
acquisition will lead to an increase in our market share once
the economy begins to recover. However, continued revenue growth
depends on the introduction and market acceptance of new
products and solutions and continued market demand for our
products. We will continue our focus on expense management while
improving our resource allocation to fund investment in
strategic initiatives. Our actions are designed to preserve our
revenue-generating potential, increase our focus on key growth
opportunities, and at the same time improve operating leverage
over the long term.
Subsequent
Event
On May 20, 2009, we entered into an agreement to acquire
Data Domain, a leading provider of storage solutions for backup
and archive applications based on deduplication technology. Data
Domain deduplication storage systems are designed to deliver
reliable, efficient and cost-effective solutions that enable
enterprises of all sizes to manage, retain and protect their
data. The agreement was subsequently amended on June 3,
2009. Pursuant to the terms of the definitive merger agreement
relating to the merger, each share of Data Domain common stock
issued and outstanding immediately prior to the completion of
merger will be cancelled and converted into the right to
receive, subject to adjustment, a combination of $16.45 in cash
and a certain number of shares of our common stock, calculated
based on an exchange ratio.
37
The merger, if completed, may result in material but
indeterminable increases in our revenues, operating results,
financial position and cash flows. While we anticipate cost
synergies associated with combining facilities, IT
infrastructure, and certain functions such as finance, human
resources and administrative services with those of Data Domain,
differences between our and Data Domains operations could
cause unforeseen delays in the integration process, result in
lower savings than originally anticipated, or both, which could
adversely affect NetApps business and operating results.
Critical
Accounting Estimates and Policies
Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results
of operations are based upon our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. The preparation of such statements requires us to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reporting period and the
reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the
financial statements. Our estimates are based on historical
experience and other assumptions that we consider to be
appropriate in the circumstances. However, actual future results
may vary from our estimates.
We believe that the following accounting policies are
critical as defined by the Securities and Exchange
Commission, in that they are both highly important to the
portrayal of our financial condition and results and require
difficult management judgments and assumptions about matters
that are inherently uncertain. We also have other important
policies, including those related to derivative instruments and
concentration of credit risk. However, these policies do not
meet the definition of critical accounting policies because they
do not generally require us to make estimates or judgments that
are difficult or subjective. These policies are discussed in
Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements
accompanying this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We believe the accounting policies described below are the ones
that most frequently require us to make estimates and judgments
and therefore are critical to the understanding of our results
of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue recognition and allowances
|
|
|
|
Valuation of goodwill and intangibles
|
|
|
|
Accounting for income taxes
|
|
|
|
Inventory write-downs
|
|
|
|
Restructuring accruals
|
|
|
|
Impairment losses on investments
|
|
|
|
Fair value measurements
|
|
|
|
Accounting for stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
Loss contingencies
|
Revenue
Recognition and Allowances
We apply the provisions of Statement of Position
(SOP)
No. 97-2,
Software Revenue Recognition
(SOP No. 97-2),
and related interpretations to our product sales, both hardware
and software, because our software is essential to the
performance of our hardware. We recognize revenue when:
|
|
|
|
|
Persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists: It is our customary practice to have a
purchase order
and/or
contract prior to recognizing revenue on an arrangement from our
end users, customers, value-added resellers, or distributors.
|
|
|
|
Delivery has occurred: Our product is
physically delivered to our customers, generally with standard
transfer terms such as FOB origin. We typically do not allow for
restocking rights with any of our value-added resellers or
distributors. Products shipped with acceptance criteria or
return rights are not recognized
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
as revenue until all criteria are achieved. If undelivered
products or services exist that are essential to the
functionality of the delivered product in an arrangement,
delivery is not considered to have occurred.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fee is fixed or determinable: Arrangements
with payment terms extending beyond our standard terms,
conditions and practices are not considered to be fixed or
determinable. Revenue from such arrangements is recognized as
the fees become due and payable. We typically do not allow for
price-protection rights with any of our value-added resellers or
distributors.
|
|
|
|
Collection is probable: Probability of
collection is assessed on a
customer-by-customer
basis. Customers are subjected to a credit review process that
evaluates the customers financial position and ultimately
their ability to pay. If it is determined at the outset of an
arrangement that collection is not probable based upon our
review process, revenue is recognized upon cash receipt.
|
Our multiple element arrangements include our systems and one or
more of the following undelivered software-related elements:
software entitlements and maintenance, premium hardware
maintenance, and storage review services. Our software
entitlements and maintenance entitle our customers to receive
unspecified product upgrades and enhancements on a
when-and-if-available
basis, bug fixes, and patch releases. Premium hardware
maintenance services include contracts for technical support and
minimum response times. Revenues from software entitlements and
maintenance, premium hardware maintenance services and storage
review services are recognized ratably over the contractual
term, generally from one to three years. We also offer extended
service contracts (which extend our standard parts warranty and
may include premium hardware maintenance) at the end of the
warranty term; revenues from these contracts are recognized
ratably over the contract term. We typically sell technical
consulting services separately from any of our other revenue
elements, either on a time and materials basis or for fixed
price standard projects; we recognize revenue for these services
as they are performed. Revenue from hardware installation
services is recognized at the time of delivery and any remaining
costs are accrued, as the remaining undelivered services are
considered to be inconsequential and perfunctory. For
arrangements with multiple elements, we recognize as revenue the
difference between the total arrangement price and the greater
of fair value or stated price for any undelivered elements
(the residual method).
For our undelivered software-related elements, we apply the
provisions of
SOP No. 97-2
and determine fair value of these undelivered elements based on
vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE), which for
us consists of the prices charged when these services are sold
separately either alone, in the case of software entitlements
and maintenance, or as a bundled element which always includes
software entitlements and maintenance and premium hardware
maintenance, and may also include storage review services. To
determine the fair value of these elements, we analyze both the
selling prices when elements are sold separately as well as the
concentrations of those prices. We believe those concentrations
have been sufficient to enable us to establish VSOE of fair
value for the undelivered elements. If VSOE cannot be obtained
to establish fair value of the undelivered elements,
paragraph 12 of
SOP No. 97-2
would require that revenue from the entire arrangement be
initially deferred and recognized ratably over the period these
elements are delivered.
For income statement presentation purposes, once fair value has
been determined for our undelivered bundled elements, we
allocate revenue first to software entitlements and maintenance,
based on VSOE of its fair value with the remainder allocated to
other service revenues.
We record reductions to revenue for estimated sales returns at
the time of shipment. Sales returns are estimated based on
historical sales returns, current trends, and our expectations
regarding future experience. We monitor and analyze the accuracy
of sales returns estimates by reviewing actual returns and
adjust them for future expectations to determine the adequacy of
our current and future reserve needs. Our reserve levels have
been sufficient to cover actual returns and have not required
material changes in subsequent periods. While we currently have
no expectations for significant changes to these reserves, if
actual future returns and allowances differ from past
experience, additional allowances may be required.
We also maintain a separate allowance for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses based on our assessment of the collectibility
of specific customer accounts and the aging of the accounts
receivable. We analyze accounts receivable and historical bad
debts, customer concentrations, customer solvency, current
economic and geographic trends, and changes in customer payment
terms and practices when evaluating the adequacy of our current
and
39
future allowance. In circumstances where we are aware of a
specific customers inability to meet its financial
obligations to us, a specific allowance for bad debt is
estimated and recorded, which reduces the recognized receivable
to the estimated amount we believe will ultimately be collected.
We monitor and analyze the accuracy of allowance for doubtful
accounts estimate by reviewing past collectibility and adjust it
for future expectations to determine the adequacy of our current
and future allowance. Our reserve levels have generally been
sufficient to cover credit losses. Our allowance for doubtful
accounts as of April 24, 2009 was $3.1 million,
compared to $2.4 million as of April 25, 2008. If the
financial condition of our customers were to deteriorate,
resulting in an impairment of their ability to make payments,
additional allowances may be required.
Valuation
of Goodwill and Intangibles
Identifiable intangible assets are amortized over time, while
in-process research and development is recorded as a charge on
the date of acquisition and goodwill is capitalized, subject to
periodic review for impairment. Accordingly, the allocation of
the acquisition cost to identifiable intangible assets has a
significant impact on our future operating results. The
allocation process requires extensive use of estimates and
assumptions, including estimates of future cash flows expected
to be generated by the acquired assets. Should conditions be
different than managements current assessment, material
write-downs of the fair value of intangible assets may be
required. We periodically review the estimated remaining useful
lives of our intangible assets. A reduction in the estimate of
remaining useful life could result in accelerated amortization
expense or a write-down in future periods. As such, any future
write-downs of these assets would adversely affect our operating
results.
Under our accounting policy we perform an annual review of the
valuation of goodwill in the fourth quarter of each fiscal year,
or more often if indicators of impairment exist. Triggering
events for impairment reviews may be indicators such as adverse
industry or economic trends, restructuring actions, lower
projections of profitability, or a sustained decline in our
market capitalization. Evaluations of possible impairment and,
if applicable, adjustments to carrying values require us to
estimate, among other factors, future cash flows, useful lives,
and fair market values of our reporting units and assets. When
we conduct our evaluation of goodwill, the fair value of
goodwill is assessed using valuation techniques that require
significant management judgment. Should conditions be different
from managements last assessment, significant write-downs
of goodwill may be required, which would adversely affect our
operating results. In fiscal 2009 we performed such evaluation
and found no impairment of goodwill. As of April 24, 2009,
our assets included $681.0 million in goodwill. See
Note 12, Goodwill and Purchased Intangible
Assets, to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
In fiscal 2009, we increased goodwill by $0.9 million
relating to the tax benefits associated with the subsequent
exercise of previously vested assumed Spinnaker and Onaro
options. During fiscal 2008, we recorded goodwill of
$79.2 million in connection with our Onaro acquisition and
a decrease of goodwill for $0.2 million in connection with
the escrow received from our Topio acquisition in fiscal 2007.
Accounting
for Income Taxes
The determination of our tax provision is subject to judgments
and estimates due to the complexity of the tax law that we are
subject to in several tax jurisdictions. Earnings derived from
our international business are generally taxed at rates that are
lower than U.S. rates, resulting in a lower effective tax
rate than the U.S. statutory tax rate of 35.0%. The ability
to maintain our current effective tax rate is contingent on
existing tax laws in both the United States and the respective
countries in which our international subsidiaries are located.
Future changes in domestic or international tax laws could
affect the continued realization of the tax benefits we are
currently receiving. In addition, a decrease in the percentage
of our total earnings from international business or a change in
the mix of international business among particular tax
jurisdictions could increase our overall effective tax rate.
We account for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes.
SFAS No. 109 requires that deferred tax assets and
liabilities be recognized for the effect of temporary
differences between the carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts
used for income tax purposes. SFAS No. 109 also
requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by a valuation
allowance if it is more likely than not that some or all of the
deferred tax asset will not be realized. We have provided a
valuation allowance of $28.0 million as of April 24,
2009,
40
compared to $28.6 million as of April 25, 2008 on
certain of our deferred tax assets. The $0.5 million
decrease in valuation allowance in fiscal 2009 was primarily
related to changes in the blended state tax rates. Tax
attributes related to the exercise of employee stock options are
not realized until they result in a reduction of taxes payable.
Pursuant to SFAS No. 123R, we do not include
unrealized stock option attributes as components of our gross
deferred tax assets and corresponding valuation allowance
disclosures. The tax effected amounts of gross unrealized net
operating loss and business tax credit carryforwards, and their
corresponding valuation allowance at April 24, 2009 and
April 25, 2008 are $278.9 million and
$245.1 million, respectively.
On April 28, 2007, we adopted Financial Interpretation
No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes-an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109
(FIN 48). FIN No. 48 clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an
enterprises financial statements in accordance with
SFAS No. 109. This interpretation prescribes a
recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. As a
result of the implementation of FIN No. 48, we
recognize the tax liability for uncertain income tax positions
on the income tax return based on the two-step process
prescribed in the interpretation. The first step is to determine
whether it is more likely than not that each income tax position
would be sustained upon audit. The second step is to estimate
and measure the tax benefit as the amount that has a greater
than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement
with the tax authority. Estimating these amounts requires us to
determine the probability of various possible outcomes. We
evaluate these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis.
This evaluation is based on the consideration of several
factors, including changes in facts or circumstances, changes in
applicable tax law, settlement of issues under audit, and new
exposures. If we later determine that our exposure is lower or
that the liability is not sufficient to cover our revised
expectations, we adjust the liability and effect a related
change in our tax provision during the period in which we make
such determination.
We are currently undergoing federal income tax audits in the
United States and several foreign tax jurisdictions. The rights
to some of our intellectual property (IP) are owned
by certain of our foreign subsidiaries, and payments are made
between foreign and U.S. tax jurisdictions relating to the
use of this IP in a qualified cost sharing arrangement.
Recently, several other U.S. companies have had their
foreign IP arrangements challenged as part of IRS examinations,
which have resulted in material proposed assessments
and/or
pending litigation. Effective September 27, 2007, the
IRSs Large and Mid-Sized Business Division
(LMSB) released a Coordinated Issues Paper
(CIP) with respect to qualified cost sharing
arrangements (CSAs). Specifically, this CIP provides
guidance to IRS personnel concerning methods that may be applied
to evaluate the arms length charge (buy-in payment) for
internally developed (pre-existing) as well as
acquisition-related intangible property that is made available
to a qualified CSA. During fiscal year 2009 we received Notices
of Proposed Adjustments from the IRS in connection with a
federal income tax audit of our fiscal 2003 and 2004 tax year
tax returns. We recently filed a protest with the IRS in
response to the Notices of Proposed Adjustments. The Notices of
Proposed Adjustments focus primarily on issues of the timing and
the amount of income recognized and deductions taken during the
audit years and on the level of cost allocations made to foreign
operations during the audit years. If upon the conclusion of
these audits the ultimate determination of our taxes owed in any
of these tax jurisdictions is for an amount in excess of the tax
provision we have recorded in the applicable period or
subsequently reserved for, our overall tax expense and effective
tax rate may be adversely impacted in the period of adjustment.
Effective March 20, 2008, the IRSs LMSB also released
a CIP with respect to the cost sharing of stock based
compensation. Specifically, this CIP provides guidance to IRS
personnel concerning stock based compensation related to a CSA
by providing that the parties to a CSA will share all costs
related to intangible development of the covered intangibles,
including but not limited to, salaries, bonuses, and other
payroll costs and benefits. Taxpayers should include all forms
of compensation in the cost pool, including those costs related
to stock-based compensation. On May 27, 2009, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Xilinx
Inc. v. Commissioner that stock-based compensation must be
included in the research and development cost base of companies
that have entered into a CSA and must, therefore, be allocated
among the participants based on anticipated benefits. The
Courts reversal of the prior U.S. Tax Court decision
will impact our estimate of tax benefits that were required to
be recognized under FIN 48. We are evaluating the impact of
the Xilinx case on our provision for income taxes for the first
quarter of fiscal 2010, but expect any final adjustment will be
limited to a reduction of our unrecognized tax attributes. Our
international operations currently benefit from a tax ruling
41
concluded in the Netherlands, which expires in 2010. If we are
unable to negotiate a similar tax ruling upon expiration of the
current ruling, our effective tax rate could increase and our
operating results could be adversely affected. Our effective tax
rate could also be adversely affected by different and evolving
interpretations of existing law or regulations, which in turn
would negatively impact our operating and financial results.
The Obama administration recently announced several proposals to
reform United States tax rules, including proposals that may
result in a reduction or elimination of the deferral of United
States income tax on our future unrepatriated earnings. Absent a
restructuring of some legal entities and their functionality,
the changes as currently proposed would result in some of the
future unrepatriated earnings being taxed at the United States
federal income tax rate.
Inventory
Write-Downs
Our inventory balance was $61.1 million as of
April 24, 2009, compared to $70.2 million as of
April 25, 2008. Inventories are stated at the lower of cost
or market (which approximates actual cost on a
first-in,
first-out basis). We perform an in-depth excess and obsolete
analysis of our inventory based upon assumptions about future
demand and market conditions. We adjust the inventory value
based on estimated excess and obsolete inventories determined
primarily by future demand forecasts. Although we strive for
accuracy in our forecasts of future product demand, any
significant unanticipated changes in demand or technological
developments could have a significant impact on the value of our
inventory and commitments and on our reported results. If actual
market conditions are less favorable than those projected,
additional write-downs and other charges against earnings may be
required. If actual market conditions are more favorable, we may
realize higher gross margins in the period when the written-down
inventory is sold. During the past few years, our inventory
reserves have been sufficient to cover excess and obsolete
exposure and have not required material changes in subsequent
periods.
We are subject to a variety of federal, state, local, and
foreign environmental regulations relating to the use, storage,
discharge, and disposal of hazardous chemicals used in the
manufacture of our products, which may require design changes or
recycling of products we manufacture. We will continue to
monitor our compliance with these regulations, which may require
us to incur higher costs, and adversely impact our operating
results.
Restructuring
Accruals
In fiscal 2009 we recorded restructuring and other charges of
$54.4 million. We recognize a liability for restructuring
costs when the liability is incurred. The restructuring accruals
are based upon management estimates at the time they are
recorded. These estimates can change depending upon changes in
facts and circumstances subsequent to the date the original
liability was recorded. The main components of our restructuring
charges are workforce reduction, intangibles and fixed assets
write-offs and non-cancelable lease costs related to excess
facilities. Severance-related charges are accrued when it is
determined that a liability has been incurred, which is
generally when individuals have been notified of their
termination dates and expected severance payments. We record
contract cancellation costs when contracts are terminated. The
decision to eliminate excess facilities results in charges for
lease termination fees and future commitments to pay lease
charges, net of estimated future sublease income. We recognize
charges for elimination of excess facilities when we have
vacated the premises. Intangible asset write-offs consist of
impairment of acquired intangible assets related to our decision
to cease the development and availability of SMOS. Fixed assets
write-offs primarily consist of equipment and furniture
associated with excess facilities being eliminated, and are
based on an estimate of the amounts and timing of future cash
flows related to the expected future remaining use and ultimate
sale or disposal of the equipment and furniture.
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
accruals, including the various assumptions noted above. If
actual results differ significantly from our estimates, we may
be required to adjust our restructuring accruals in the future.
42
Impairment
Losses on Investments
All of our
available-for-sale
investments and nonmarketable securities are subject to periodic
impairment review. Investments are considered to be impaired
when a decline in fair value is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
This determination requires significant judgment. For publicly
traded investments, impairment is determined based upon the
specific facts and circumstances present at the time, including
factors such as current economic and market conditions, the
credit rating of the securitys issuer, the length of time
an investments fair value has been below our carrying
value, our ability and intent to hold investments to maturity or
for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated
recovery in fair value. If an investments decline in fair
value, caused by factors other than changes in interest rates,
is deemed to be
other-than-temporary,
we reduce its carrying value to its estimated fair value, as
determined based on quoted market prices, liquidation values or
other metrics. For investments in publicly held companies, we
recognize an impairment charge when the decline in the fair
value of our investment is below its cost basis and is judged to
be
other-than-temporary.
The ultimate value realized on these investments in publicly
held companies is subject to market price volatility until they
are sold.
We actively review, along with our investment advisors, current
investment ratings, company specific events, and general
economic conditions in managing our investments and determining
whether there is a significant decline in fair value that is
other-than-temporary.
As of April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, our
short-term and long-term investments in marketable securities
have been classified as
available-for-sale
and are carried at fair value.
Available-for-sale
investments with original maturities of greater than three
months at the date of purchases are classified as short-term
investments as these investments generally consist of marketable
securities that are intended to be available to meet current
cash requirements. Currently, all marketable securities held by
us are classified as
available-for-sale
and our entire auction rate securities (ARS) portfolio and our
investment in the Reserve Primary Fund (Primary
Fund) are classified as long-term investments.
Our ARS are securities with long-term nominal maturities which,
in accordance with investment policy guidelines, had credit
ratings of AAA and Aaa at the time of purchase. During the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, we reclassified all of our
investments in ARS from short-term investments to long-term
investments as we believed our ability to liquidate these
investments in the next twelve months was uncertain. Based on an
analysis of the fair value and marketability of these
investments, we recorded temporary impairment charges of
approximately $7.0 million during fiscal 2009, partially
offset by $0.3 million in unrealized gains within other
comprehensive income (loss). During fiscal 2009, we recorded an
other-than-temporary
impairment loss of $2.1 million due to a significant
decline in the estimated fair values of certain of our ARS
related to credit quality risk and rating downgrades.
During fiscal 2008 and 2007, recognized gains and losses on
available-for-sale
investments were not material. Management determines the
appropriate classification of debt and equity securities at the
time of purchase and reevaluates the classification at each
reporting date. The fair value of our marketable securities,
including those included in long-term investments, was
$1,228,220 and $543,226 as of April 24, 2009 and
April 25, 2008, respectively.
The valuation models used to estimate the fair value of our ARS
included numerous assumptions such as assessments of the
underlying structure of each security, expected cash flows,
discount rates, credit ratings, workout periods, and overall
capital market liquidity. These assumptions, assessments and the
interpretations of relevant market data are subject to
uncertainties, are difficult to predict and require significant
judgment. The use of different assumptions, applying different
judgments to inherently subjective matters and changes in future
market conditions could result in significantly different
estimates of fair value. There is no assurance as to when the
market for auction rate securities will stabilize. The fair
value of our ARS could change significantly based on market
conditions and continued uncertainties in the credit markets. If
these uncertainties continue or if these securities experience
credit rating downgrades, we may incur additional temporary
impairment related to our auction rate securities portfolio. We
will continue to monitor the fair value of our ARS and relevant
market conditions and will record additional temporary or
other-than-temporary
impairments if future circumstances warrant such charges.
As a result of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers, which
occurred during fiscal 2009, we recorded an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $11.8 million on our corporate bonds
related to investments in Lehman Brothers securities and
approximately $9.3 million on our investments in the
Primary Fund that held Lehman Brothers investments. As of
April 24, 2009, we have an investment in the Primary Fund,
an AAA-rated money market fund at the time of purchase, with a
par value of $60.9 million and an estimated fair value of
$51.6 million, which suspended redemptions in September
2008 and is in the process of liquidating its portfolio of
43
investments. The Primary Fund suspended redemptions in September
2008, and on December 3, 2008, it announced a plan for
liquidation and distribution of assets that includes the
establishment of a special reserve to be set aside out of its
assets for pending or threatened claims, as well as anticipated
costs and expenses, including related legal and accounting fees.
On February 26, 2009, the Primary Fund announced a plan to
set aside $3.5 billion of the funds remaining assets
as the special reserve which may be increased or
decreased as further information becomes available. Our pro rata
share of the $3.5 billion special reserve is approximately
$41.5 million. The Primary Fund announced plans to continue
to make periodic distributions, up to the amount of the special
reserve, on a pro-rata basis. The Primary Fund has received an
SEC order providing that the SEC will supervise the distribution
of assets from the Primary Fund. We could realize additional
losses in our holdings of the Primary Fund and may not receive
all or a portion of our remaining balance in the Primary Fund as
a result of market conditions and ongoing litigation against the
fund
To determine the fair value of nonmarketable investments, we use
the most recent information available to us, including new
financings or estimates of current fair value, as well as
through traditional valuation techniques. It is our policy to
review the fair value of these investments on a regular basis to
determine whether the investments in these companies are
other-than-temporarily
impaired. In the case of privately-held companies, this
evaluation is based on information that we request from these
companies. This evaluation includes, but is not limited to,
reviewing company cash position, financing needs and prospects,
earnings or revenue outlook, operational performance, management
or ownership changes and competition. This information is not
subject to the same disclosure regulations as United States
publicly-traded companies, and as such, the basis for these
evaluations is subject to the timing and the accuracy of the
data received from these companies. If we believe the carrying
value of an investment is in excess of fair value, and this
difference is
other-than-temporary,
it is our policy to write down the investment to fair value. The
carrying value of our investments in privately-held companies
were $4.0 million and $11.2 million as of
April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, respectively.
During fiscal 2009 and 2008, we recorded $6.3 million and
$1.6 million of impairment charges, respectively, for our
investments in privately-held companies, which were recorded in
net gain (loss) on investments in our consolidated statements of
operations, and adjusted the carrying amount of those
investments to fair value, as we deemed the decline in the value
of these assets to be
other-than-temporary.
Fair
Value Measurements
We adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements, effective April 26, 2008 for
financial assets and liabilities that are being measured and
reported at fair value on a recurring basis. Under this
standard, fair value is defined as the price that would be
received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (i.e.,
the exit price) in an orderly transaction between
market participants at the measurement date.
SFAS No. 157 establishes a hierarchy for inputs used
in measuring fair value that minimizes the use of unobservable
inputs by requiring the use of observable market data when
available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants
would use in pricing the asset or liability based on active
market data. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the
assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset
or liability based on the best information available in the
circumstances.
The fair value hierarchy is broken down into the three input
levels summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 Valuations are based on quoted prices
in active markets for identical assets or liabilities, and
readily accessible by us at the reporting date. Examples of
assets and liabilities utilizing Level 1 inputs are certain
money market funds, U.S. Treasury notes and trading
securities with quoted prices on active markets.
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Valuations based on inputs other than
the quoted prices in active markets that are observable either
directly or indirectly in active markets. Examples of assets and
liabilities utilizing Level 2 inputs are
U.S. government agency bonds, corporate bonds, corporate
securities, certificates of deposit, and
over-the-counter
derivatives.
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Valuations based on unobservable inputs
in which there is little or no market data, which require us to
develop our own assumptions. Examples of assets and liabilities
utilizing Level 3 inputs are cost method investments, ARS,
and the Primary Fund.
|
We measure our
available-for-sale
securities at fair value on a recurring basis.
Available-for-sale
securities include U.S. Treasury securities,
U.S. government agency bonds, corporate bonds, corporate
securities, auction rate
44
securities money market funds and certificates of deposit. Where
possible, we utilize quoted market prices to measure and such
items are classified as Level 1 in the hierarchy. When
quoted market prices for identical assets are unavailable,
varying valuation techniques are used. Such assets are
classified as Level 2 or Level 3 in the hierarchy. We
classify items in Level 2 if the investments are valued
using observable inputs to quoted market prices, benchmark
yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes or alternative
pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. We
classify items in Level 3 if the investments are valued
using a pricing model, based on unobservable inputs in the
market or require us to develop our own assumptions. Our
assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair
value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and
considers factors specific to the investment.
We evaluate our investments for
other-than-temporary
impairment in accordance with guidance provided by
SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities and related
guidance. We consider and review factors such as the length of
time and extent to which fair value has been below cost basis,
the significance of the loss incurred, the financial condition
and credit rating of the issuer and insurance guarantor, the
length of time the investments have been illiquid, and our
ability and intent to hold the investment for a period of time
which may be sufficient for anticipated recovery of market value.
We are also exposed to market risk relating to our
available-for-sale
investments due to uncertainties in the credit and capital
markets. As a result of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman
Brothers, we recorded an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $21.1 million in fiscal 2009 related
to Lehman Brothers corporate bonds and the Primary Fund that
held Lehman Brothers investments, as well as an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $2.1 million related to the value of
our ARS. The fair value of our investments may change
significantly due to events and conditions in the credit and
capital markets. These securities/issuers could be subject to
review for possible downgrade. Any downgrade in these credit
ratings may result in an additional decline in the estimated
fair value of our investments. We will continue to monitor and
evaluate the accounting for our investment portfolio on a
quarterly basis for additional
other-than-temporary
impairment charges. We could realize additional losses in our
holdings of the Primary Fund and may not receive all or a
portion of our remaining balance in the Primary Fund as a result
of market conditions and ongoing litigation against the fund.
Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation
We account for stock-based compensation in accordance with
SFAS No. 123R, Share-Based Payment,
using the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value our
employee stock options. The fair value of each option grant is
estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model. Option pricing models require the input of highly
subjective assumptions, including the expected stock price
volatility, expected life, and forfeiture rate. Any changes in
these highly subjective assumptions may significantly impact the
stock-based compensation expense for the future.
Loss
Contingencies
We are subject to the possibility of various loss contingencies
arising in the course of business. We consider the likelihood of
the loss or impairment of an asset or the incurrence of a
liability as well as our ability to reasonably estimate the
amount of loss in determining loss contingencies. An estimated
loss contingency is accrued when it is probable that a liability
has been incurred or an asset has been impaired and the amount
of loss can be reasonably estimated. In April 2009, we entered
into a settlement agreement with the United States of America,
acting through the United States Department of Justice
(DOJ) and on behalf of the General Services
Administration (the GSA), under which we agreed to
pay the United States $128.0 million, plus interest of
$0.7 million, related to a dispute regarding our discount
practices and compliance with the price reduction clause
provisions of GSA contracts between August 1997 and February
2005 in consideration for the release of NetApp by the DOJ and
GSA with respect to the claims alleged in the investigation as
set forth in the settlement agreement. The agreement reflects
neither an admission nor denial by NetApp of any of the claims
alleged by the DOJ and represents a compromise to avoid
continued litigation and associated risks. NetApp made the
settlement payment on April 27, 2009. In fiscal 2008 and
2007, we did not identify or accrue for any loss contingencies.
We regularly evaluate current information available to us to
determine whether such accruals should be adjusted.
45
New
Accounting Standards
See Note 2 of the consolidated financial statements for a
full description of new accounting pronouncements, including the
respective expected dates of adoption and effects on results of
operations and financial condition.
Results
of Operations
The following table sets forth certain Consolidated Statements
of Operations data as a percentage of net revenues for the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Net Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
|
63.2
|
%
|
|
|
67.9
|
%
|
|
|
74.4
|
%
|
Software entitlements and maintenance
|
|
|
18.2
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
Service
|
|
|
22.4
|
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
GSA settlement
|
|
|
(3.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
Cost of Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product
|
|
|
29.6
|
|
|
|
28.4
|
|
|
|
29.9
|
|
Cost of software entitlements and maintenance
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Cost of service
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
58.4
|
|
|
|
60.9
|
|
|
|
60.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
34.8
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
|
32.0
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
14.6
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
Restructuring and other charges
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Operating Expenses
|
|
|
57.0
|
|
|
|
51.5
|
|
|
|
50.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from Operations
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Other Income (Expenses), Net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on investments, net
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Other income (expenses), net
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Income (Expenses), Net
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Before Income Taxes
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
11.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
|
|
9.4
|
%
|
|
|
10.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion
and Analysis of Results of Operations
Net Revenues Our net revenues for fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
3,406.4
|
|
|
$
|
3,303.2
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
2,804.3
|
|
|
|
17.8
|
%
|
46
Net revenues increased by 3.1% to $3,406.4 million in
fiscal 2009, from $3,303.2 million in fiscal 2008. The
increase in our net revenues for fiscal 2009 was due to
increases in software entitlements and maintenance revenues as
well as service revenues, partially offset by decreases in
product revenues, and the negative impact from the GSA
settlement.
Net revenues increased by 17.8% to $3,303.2 million in
fiscal 2008, from $2,804.3 million in fiscal 2007. Our
fiscal 2008 revenue growth was attributable to increased product
revenues, software entitlements and maintenance revenues, and
service.
Sales through our indirect channels represented 69.0%, 63.0% and
59.6% of net revenues for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
During fiscal 2009, two U.S. distributors accounted for
approximately 10.5% and 10.6% of our net revenues, respectively.
No distributor or other customer accounted for ten percent or
more of our net revenues during fiscal 2008 and 2007.
Product
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Product revenues
|
|
$
|
2,152.7
|
|
|
$
|
2,242.5
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)%
|
|
$
|
2,085.9
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
%
|
Product revenues decreased by $89.8 million, or 4.0% in
fiscal 2009, compared to fiscal 2008. Unit volume increased,
driven by smaller, low end systems, partially offset by
decreases in mid-range and high end systems. This trend is
consistent with a shift in customer buying patterns towards
smaller systems, due to IT spending constraints and difficult
economic conditions. In addition, average selling prices
declined, driven by lower list prices, unfavorable configuration
mix (consisting of hardware and software components, disk
capacity and disk price) and higher discounting, as well as
unfavorable foreign exchange rate changes during fiscal 2009.
Partially offsetting these factors was an increase in revenues
from add-on products, as customers focused more on extending the
useful lives and capacity of their existing storage solutions.
Product revenues increased by $156.6 million or 7.5% to
$2,242.5 million in fiscal 2008, from $2,085.9 million
in fiscal 2007. Unit volume increased, driven by low end and
mid-range systems, partially offset by a slight decrease in high
end systems. In addition, average selling prices increased,
driven by higher list prices and favorable configuration mix,
partially offset by higher discounting. Revenue from add-on
products increased, as customers focused on extending the
capacity of their storage solutions.
Our systems are highly configurable to respond to customer
requirements in the open systems storage markets that we serve.
This wide variation in customer configurations can significantly
impact revenue, cost of revenue, and gross margin performance.
Price changes, unit volumes, and product configuration mix can
also impact revenue, cost of revenue and gross margin
performance. Disks are a significant component of our storage
systems. Industry disk pricing continues to fall every year, and
we pass along those price decreases to our customers while
working to maintain relatively constant margins on our disk
drives. While price per petabyte continues to decline, system
performance, increased capacity and software to manage this
increased capacity have an offsetting impact on product revenue.
Software
Entitlements and Maintenance Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Software entitlements and maintenance revenues
|
|
$
|
618.4
|
|
|
$
|
486.9
|
|
|
|
27.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
341.3
|
|
|
|
42.7
|
%
|
Software entitlements and maintenance revenues increased by
$131.5 million, or 27.0% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal
2008. This year over year increase in software entitlements and
maintenance revenues was due
47
primarily to the recognition of service contracts that were
purchased or renewed in prior years, and to a lesser extent,
service contracts entered into in fiscal 2009.
Software entitlements and maintenance revenues increased by
$145.6 million, or 42.7% in fiscal 2008, compared to fiscal
2007. The year over year increase was due to a larger installed
base of customers who have purchased or renewed software
entitlements and maintenance.
Service
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Service revenues
|
|
$
|
764.1
|
|
|
$
|
573.8
|
|
|
|
33.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
377.1
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
%
|
Service revenues increased by $190.3 million, or 33.2% in
fiscal 2009, compared to fiscal 2008. Service revenues include
service maintenance, professional services and educational and
training services. The primary reason for the increase was
increased service contract revenue related to an increase in the
installed base. In addition, revenue from professional services
increased due to increased integration consulting services
provided in fiscal 2009 and improved productivity of our
professional service personnel.
Service revenues increased by $196.7 million, or 52.1% in
fiscal 2008, compared to fiscal 2007. The primary reasons for
the increase were increased service contract revenue, related to
an increase in the installed base and the average revenue
generated per installed base unit, and an increase in
professional services.
GSA
settlement
In April 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with the
United States of America, acting through the United States
Department of Justice and on behalf of the General Services
Administration (the GSA), under which we agreed to
pay the United States $128.0 million, plus interest of
$0.7 million, related to a dispute regarding our discount
practices and compliance with the price reduction clause
provisions of its GSA contracts between August 1997 and February
2005. We have recorded the settlement as a reduction of revenues
in fiscal 2009.
Total
International Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
International
|
|
$
|
1,652.8
|
|
|
|
48.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,554.3
|
|
|
|
47.1
|
%
|
|
|
6.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,254.0
|
|
|
|
44.7
|
%
|
|
|
23.9
|
%
|
United States
|
|
|
1,753.6
|
|
|
|
51.5
|
%
|
|
|
1,748.9
|
|
|
|
52.9
|
%
|
|
|
0.3
|
%
|
|
|
1,550.3
|
|
|
|
55.3
|
%
|
|
|
12.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
3,406.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,303.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,804.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total international revenues (including U.S. exports)
increased by 6.3% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. Total
international revenues (including U.S. exports) increased
by 23.9% in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007.
Cost
of Revenues
Our cost of revenue includes: (1) cost of product revenue,
which includes the costs of manufacturing and shipping our
storage systems, and amortization of purchased intangible
assets, inventory write-downs, and warranty costs; (2) cost
of software maintenance and entitlements, which includes the
costs of providing software entitlements and maintenance and
third party royalty costs, and (3) cost of service, which
reflects costs associated with providing services for support
center activities and global service partnership programs.
48
Cost
of Product Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cost of product revenue
|
|
$
|
1,007.6
|
|
|
|
46.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
938.4
|
|
|
|
41.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
838.0
|
|
|
|
40.2
|
%
|
Cost of product revenue as a percentage of product revenue
increased by 5.0% in fiscal 2009 as compared to fiscal 2008. The
increase in total costs was primarily due to increased unit
volume. The increase in costs as a percentage of revenues was
due to a larger decrease in average selling prices than
corresponding costs, primarily standard material costs, across
all of our systems.
Cost of product revenue as a percentage of product revenue
increased by 1.6% in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007. The
increase in total costs was primarily due to increased unit
volume. The increase in costs as a percentage of revenues was
due to a lower increase in average selling prices than
corresponding costs, primarily related to standard material
costs on new low end systems.
Stock-based compensation expense included in cost of product
revenues was $3.3 million, $3.4 million and
$3.7 million in fiscal 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.
Amortization of existing technology included in cost of product
revenues was $24.5 million, $22.6 million and
$17.6 million for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
In the first quarter of fiscal 2009, we implemented a change in
the reporting of warranty costs and reported these costs in cost
of product revenues. These costs were included in cost of
service revenues in previous periods. Our cost of product
revenues and service revenues for fiscal years 2008 and 2007
reflect a reclassification of $27.0 million and
$22.1 million, respectively, to conform to current period
presentation. There was no change in warranty costs as a
percentage of product revenue in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007.
We expect future product gross margins to be impacted by a
variety of factors including selective price reductions and
discounts, increased indirect channel sales, higher software
revenue mix and the margin profile of new products. If our
shipment volumes, product mix, average selling prices and
pricing actions that impact our product gross margin continue to
be adversely affected by the economic downturn or market
factors, our gross margin could decline.
Cost
of Software Entitlements and Maintenance Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Software
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entitlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entitlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entitlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cost of software entitlements and maintenance revenues
|
|
$
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
10.2
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
Cost of software entitlements and maintenance revenues as a
percentage of software entitlements and maintenance revenue
remained relatively flat at 1.5% in fiscal 2009 and 1.8% in
fiscal 2008, respectively. Cost of software entitlements and
maintenance revenues as a percentage of software entitlements
and maintenance revenue decreased in fiscal 2008 compared to
fiscal 2007 due to lower third-party royalty expenses.
Cost
of Service Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Service
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Service
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cost of service revenues
|
|
$
|
399.7
|
|
|
|
52.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
342.8
|
|
|
|
59.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
251.6
|
|
|
|
66.7
|
%
|
49
Cost of service revenue as a percentage of service revenue
decreased by 7.4% in fiscal 2009 from fiscal 2008 and by 7.0% in
fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007. The increase in service
cost of revenues in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008 and in
fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily due to
increased service infrastructure spending to support our
customers, which included additional professional support
engineers, increased support center activities for a larger
installed base of product, and global service partnership
programs. The decrease in service cost of revenues as a
percentage of service revenue in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal
2008 and fiscal 2007 was primarily due to increased service
revenue volume and improved productivity, partially offset by
higher costs.
Stock-based compensation expense of $12.3 million was
included in the cost of service revenue for fiscal 2009 compared
to $10.4 million and $10.1 million for fiscal 2008 and
2007, respectively.
In the first quarter of fiscal 2009, we implemented a change in
the reporting of warranty costs and reported these costs in cost
of product revenues. These costs were included in cost of
service revenues in previous periods. Our cost of product
revenues and service revenues for fiscal years 2008 and 2007
reflect a reclassification of $27.0 million and
$22.1 million, respectively, to conform to current period
presentation.
Service gross margin is also typically impacted by factors such
as changes in the size of our installed base of product, as well
as the timing of support service initiations and renewals, and
incremental investments in our customer support infrastructure.
Sales and Marketing Sales and marketing
expense consists primarily of salaries and related benefits,
commissions, allocated facilities and IT costs, advertising and
promotional expenses, stock-based compensation expense, and
travel and entertainment expenses. Sales and marketing expense
for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
$
|
1,186.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,075.6
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
895.8
|
|
|
|
20.1
|
%
|
Sales and marketing expense increased by $110.5 million, or
10.3% in fiscal 2009 compared to fiscal 2008. The increase was
primarily due to an increase in salaries and related benefits
primarily due to increased average compensation and incentive
plan costs per person, and an increase in IT expenses related to
new software implementations partially offset by a decrease in
marketing expenses and travel and entertainment expenses.
The increase in sales and marketing expense in fiscal 2008
compared to fiscal 2007 was due to increased commission expenses
resulting from increased revenues, higher payroll expenses due
to higher profitability, higher partner program expenses, the
continued worldwide investment in our sales and global service
organizations associated with selling complete enterprise
solutions, and higher stock-based compensation expenses.
Sales and marketing expense for fiscal 2009 was favorably
impacted by the strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative
to other foreign currencies (primarily Euro, British pound and
Australian Dollar). Had foreign exchange rates remained constant
in these periods, our sales and marketing expense in fiscal 2009
would have been approximately $10.5 million higher, or
0.9%, higher. The foreign currency exchange rate impact on sales
and marketing expense was insignificant for fiscal 2008 and 2007.
Stock-based compensation expense included in sales and marketing
expense in fiscal 2009 was $65.1 million compared to stock
compensation expense of $65.4 million and
$71.7 million in fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Amortization of trademarks/trade names and customer
contracts/relationships included in sales and marketing expense
was $4.4 million in fiscal 2009 compared to
$4.2 million and $2.9 million in fiscal 2008 and
fiscal 2007, respectively.
50
Research and Development Research and
development expense consists primarily of salaries and related
benefits, allocated facilities and IT costs, depreciation and
amortization, stock-based compensation, and prototype and
engineering charges. Research and development expense for fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
$
|
498.5
|
|
|
$
|
452.2
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
|
|
17.3
|
%
|
Research and development expense increased by
$46.3 million, or 10.2% in fiscal 2009 as compared to
fiscal 2008. The increase in research and development expense
was primarily due to an increase in salaries and related
benefits resulting from increased average compensation and
incentive plan costs per person, as well as higher average
headcount, and an increase in facilities expenses related to new
engineering labs.
The increase in research and development expense in fiscal 2008
compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily due increased headcount,
ongoing operating impact of acquisitions, ongoing current and
future product development and enhancement efforts, higher
performance-based payroll expenses due to higher profitability,
and higher stock-based compensation expense.
Stock-based compensation expense included in research and
development expense for fiscal 2009 was $37.9 million,
compared to $46.6 million and $51.3 million in fiscal
2008 and 2007, respectively. No software development costs were
capitalized during any of the periods.
We believe that our future performance will depend in large part
on our ability to maintain and enhance our current product line,
develop new products that achieve market acceptance, maintain
technological competitiveness, and meet an expanding range of
customer requirements. We expect to continuously support current
and future product development, broaden our existing product
offerings and introduce new products that expand our solutions
portfolio.
General and Administrative General and
administrative expense consists primarily of salaries and
related benefits, professional and corporate legal fees,
stock-based compensation, recruiting expenses, and allocated
facilities and IT costs. General and administrative expense for
fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
$
|
203.7
|
|
|
$
|
171.5
|
|
|
|
18.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
147.5
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
%
|
General and administrative expense increased by
$32.2 million, or 18.7% in fiscal 2009 as compared to
fiscal 2008. The increase was primarily due to increased
professional and legal fees, an increase in salaries and related
benefits primarily resulting from increased average compensation
and incentive plan costs per person, and an increase in IT
expenses.
The increase in general and administrative expense in fiscal
2008 compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily due to higher payroll
expenses due to higher profitability and increased headcount,
higher stock-based compensation expense recognized, and higher
legal and professional fees for general corporate matters.
Stock-based compensation expense included in general and
administrative expense in fiscal 2009 was $22.2 million
compared to $22.1 million and $26.2 million for fiscal
2008 and 2007, respectively.
Restructuring
and Other Charges
Fiscal 2009 Restructuring Plans In February
2009, we announced our decision to execute a worldwide
restructuring program, which included a reduction in workforce,
the closing or downsizing of certain facilities, and the
establishment of a plan to outsource certain internal
activities. In December 2008, we announced our decision to cease
the development and availability of SMOS, which was originally
acquired through our acquisition of Topio in fiscal 2007. As
part of this decision, we also announced the closure of our
engineering facility in Haifa, Israel. These restructuring
activities resulted in restructuring charges totaling
$51.5 million of severance-related amounts and other
charges attributable to the termination of approximately 450
regular positions, abandoned excess facilities
51
charges relating to non-cancelable lease costs, which are net of
expected sublease income; contract cancellation charges;
outplacement expenses; fixed assets and intangibles write-offs;
as well as $2.9 million of other charges to support our
restructuring initiatives. In recording the facility lease
restructuring reserve, we made certain estimates and assumptions
related to the (i) time period over which the relevant
buildings would remain vacant, (ii) sublease terms, and
(iii) sublease rates.
As of April 24, 2009, approximately $15.9 million of
the costs associated with these activities were unpaid. We
expect that severance-related charges and other costs will be
substantially paid by the third quarter of fiscal 2010 and the
facilities-related lease payments to be substantially paid by
the third quarter of fiscal 2013.
Fiscal 2002 Restructuring Plan As of
April 24, 2009, we also have $1.3 million remaining in
facility restructuring reserves established as part of a
restructuring in fiscal 2002 related to future lease commitments
on exited facilities, net of expected sublease income. We
reevaluate our estimates and assumptions periodically and make
adjustments as necessary based on the time period over which the
facilities will be vacant, expected sublease terms, and expected
sublease rates. During fiscal 2009, we recorded restructuring
recoveries of $0.1 million resulting from a change in the
estimated operating expenses relating to this facility
restructuring reserve. We expect to substantially fulfill the
remaining contractual obligations related to this facility
restructuring reserve by fiscal 2011.
Of the restructuring reserve balance at April 24, 2009,
$14.7 million was included in other accrued liabilities,
and the remaining $2.5 million was classified as other
long-term obligations.
See Note 13, Restructuring and Other Charges,
of the Notes to our consolidated financial statements for
further discussion of our restructuring activities.
Other
Income and Expense
Interest Income Interest income for fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
$
|
57.6
|
|
|
$
|
64.6
|
|
|
|
(10.8
|
)%
|
|
$
|
68.8
|
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)%
|
The decrease in interest income in fiscal 2009 compared to
fiscal 2008 was primarily due to lower market yields on our cash
and investment portfolio, in part due to a shift of our
portfolio to shorter term investments with lower risk. This
yield decline was partially offset by an increase in our cash
and investment balances due to the issuance of the Convertible
Notes (the Note), see Note 4, Convertible
Notes and Credit Facilities of the consolidated financial
statements. The decrease in interest income in fiscal 2008
compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily driven by lower average
interest rates on our investment portfolio and lower cash and
investment balances.
We expect that period-to-period changes in interest income will
continue to be impacted by the volatility of market interest
rates, cash and investment balances, cash generated by
operations, timing of our stock repurchases, cash used in
acquisitions, capital expenditures, and payments of our
contractual obligations.
Interest Expense Interest expense for fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
$
|
(26.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(8.0
|
)
|
|
|
236.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
(11.6
|
)
|
|
|
(31.4
|
)%
|
The increase in interest expense in fiscal 2009 compared to
fiscal 2008 was primarily due to interest expense and
amortization of debt issuance costs on our 1.75% convertible
senior notes (the Notes), partially offset by lower
interest expense related to the reduced outstanding balance on
our secured credit agreement we entered into with JPMorgan in
October 2007. The decrease in interest expense in fiscal 2008
compared to fiscal 2007 was due to full repayment of the loan
agreement entered with JPMorgan (Loan Agreement),
partially offset by increased interest expense on the
$250.0 million outstanding under the revolving secured
credit agreement with JPMorgan Securities during fiscal 2008.
52
We expect period-to-period changes in interest expense to
fluctuate based on market interest rate volatility and amounts
that may be due from time to time under various outstanding debt
agreements. In addition, upon adoption of the new FSP APB
No. 14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (FSP APB
No. 14-1),
we will account separately for the estimated liability and
equity components of our Notes. As a result, we will record
incremental interest expense in connection with the
nonconvertible debt borrowing rate in our Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
Gain
(Loss) on Investments, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on investments, net
|
|
$
|
(29.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
(334.4
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(920.2
|
)%
|
During fiscal 2009, net loss on investments of
$29.6 million included a net impairment loss related to our
investments in privately held companies of $6.3 million, an
other-than-temporary impairment charge on our available-for-sale
investments related to direct and indirect investments in Lehman
Brothers securities of $21.1 million, and a decline in the
value of our auction rate securities of $2.1 million.
Net gain on sale of investments was $12.6 million for
fiscal 2008. Net gain for fiscal 2008 consisted primarily of a
gain of $13.6 million related to the sale of shares of Blue
Coat common stock offset by a net write-down of
$1.0 million for our investments in privately-held
companies. For fiscal 2007, net loss on sale of investments was
$1.5 million, including a net write-down of
$2.1 million related to the impairment of our investment in
privately-held companies.
Other
Income (Expense), Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
$
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
2507.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
(104.8
|
)%
|
Other income (expense), net, consists of primarily net exchange
losses and gains from foreign currency transactions and related
hedging activities. We believe that period-to-period changes in
foreign exchange gains or losses will continue to be impacted by
hedging costs associated with our forward and option activities
and forecast variance.
Provision
(Benefit) for Income Taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes
|
|
$
|
(41.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
73.0
|
|
|
|
(157.2
|
)%
|
|
$
|
62.0
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
%
|
For fiscal 2009, we applied to pretax income an effective tax
rate benefit of 77.6% before discrete reporting items. After
taking into account the tax effect of federal research tax
credit and other immaterial items, the effective tax rate
benefit for fiscal 2009 was 93.1%, and the effective tax rate
expense for fiscal 2008 and 2007 was 19.1% and 17.2%,
respectively. Our effective tax rate for fiscal, 2009, which was
negative and thus a benefit, decreased relative to the effective
tax rate for fiscal, 2008 primarily due to the decrease in the
U.S. portion of our income and to the benefits generated
from the retroactive extension of the research and development
tax credit which was part of the Emergency Economic
Stabilization Act of 2008. The geographic composition of our
consolidated income was impacted by losses generated in the
U.S. for restructuring charges and the GSA settlement.
These charges resulted in a taxable loss in the U.S. which
primarily drove the tax benefit.
For fiscal 2008 and 2007, we applied to pretax income an annual
effective tax rate before discrete reporting items of 13.3% and
19.0%, respectively. The decrease in the annual effective tax
rate in fiscal 2008 compared to fiscal 2007 was primarily
attributable to a relative increase in the benefits attributable
to our foreign operations, as well as to a relative decrease in
the tax impact of nondeductible stock-based compensation,
brought about in part by
53
our decision to cease granting incentive stock options. Since we
have replaced the granting of incentive stock options with the
granting of nonqualified stock options, this gives rise to the
recognition of more income tax benefits as stock-based
compensation is recognized.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The following sections discuss our principal liquidity
requirements, as well as our sources and uses of cash flow on
our liquidity and capital resources. The principal objectives of
our investment policy are the preservation of principal and
maintenance of liquidity. We attempt to mitigate default risk by
investing in high-quality investment grade securities, limiting
the time to maturity and by monitoring the counter-parties and
underlying obligors closely. We believe our cash equivalents and
short-term investments are liquid and accessible. We are not
aware of any significant deterioration in the fair value of our
cash equivalents or investments from the values reported as of
April 24, 2009.
Liquidity
Sources, Cash Requirements
Our principal sources of liquidity as of April 24, 2009,
consisted of: (1) approximately $2.6 billion in cash
and cash equivalents and short-term investments, (2) cash
we expect to generate from operations, and (3) an unsecured
revolving credit facility totaling $250.0 million, of which
$0.6 million has been allocated as of April 24, 2009
to support certain of our outstanding letters of credit. Our
principal liquidity requirements are primarily to meet our
working capital needs, including a one-time payment of
$128.7 million related to our GSA settlement, support
ongoing business activities, implement restructuring plans,
research and development, capital expenditure needs, the
proposed Data Domain acquisition and other business
acquisitions, investment in critical or complementary
technologies, and to service our debt and synthetic leases.
Key factors that could affect our cash flows include changes in
our revenue mix and profitability as well as our ability to
effectively manage our working capital, in particular, accounts
receivable and inventories and whether or not we ultimately
complete the merger with Data Domain discussed below. Based on
our current business outlook, we believe that our sources of
cash will be sufficient to fund our operations and meet our cash
requirements for at least the next 12 months. However, in
the event our liquidity is insufficient, we may be required to
further curtail spending and implement additional cost saving
measures and restructuring actions. In light of the current
economic and market conditions, we cannot be certain that we
will continue to generate cash flows at or above current levels
or that we will be able to obtain additional financing, if
necessary, on satisfactory terms, if at all.
Our investment portfolio, including the Primary Fund and auction
rate securities has been and will continue to be exposed to
market risk due to uncertainties in the credit and capital
markets. In fiscal 2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary
impairment charge to earnings of $21.1 million related to
Lehman Brothers corporate bonds and the Primary Fund that held
Lehman Brothers investments. In addition, we also recorded an
other-than-temporary impairment of $2.1 million relating to
certain auction rate securities. We could realize additional
losses in our holdings of the Primary Fund and may not receive
all or a portion of our remaining balance in the Primary Fund as
a result of market conditions and ongoing litigation against the
fund. However, we are not dependent on liquidating these
investments in the next twelve months in order to meet our
liquidity needs. We continue to closely monitor current economic
and market events to minimize our market risk on our investment
portfolio. Based on our ability to access our cash and
short-term investments, our expected operating cash flows, and
our other potential sources of cash, we do not anticipate that
the lack of liquidity of these investments will impact our
ability to fund working capital needs, capital expenditures,
acquisitions or other cash requirements. We intend to and
believe that we have the ability to hold these investments until
the market recovers. If current market conditions deteriorate
further, or the anticipated recovery in market values does not
occur, we may be required to record additional charges to
earnings in future quarters.
Capital
Expenditure Requirements
We expect to fund our capital expenditures, including our
commitments related to facilities and equipment operating leases
over the next few years through cash generated from operations,
existing cash, cash equivalents and investments. The timing and
amount of our capital requirements cannot be precisely
determined at this time and will
54
depend on a number of factors including future demand for
products, product mix, changes in the network storage industry,
economic conditions and market competition. We expect that our
existing facilities in Sunnyvale, California; Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina; and worldwide are adequate for our
requirements over at least the next two years, and that
additional space will be available as needed. However, if
current economic conditions deteriorate further, we may be
required to implement additional restructuring plans to
eliminate or consolidate excess facilities, incur cancellation
penalties and impair fixed assets.
Acquisition
Related Requirements
On May 20, 2009, we announced our entry into a definitive
agreement with Data Domain, Inc. to acquire such company in a
merger for an aggregate merger consideration of approximately
$1.5 billion in cash and common stock (net of Data
Domains cash balances). On June 3, 2009, we revised
the terms of the definitive agreement to increase the aggregate
merger consideration to $1.9 billion (net of Data
Domains cash balance). If the acquisition is completed
under the current terms, we expect that we will have to use at
least $1 billion of our cash, cash equivalent and
investments for cash consideration to Data Domain shareholders
and transaction costs. The merger is subject to customary
closing conditions, including regulatory approvals. The
transaction is valued at approximately $2 billion and is
expected to be completed in 60 to 120 days.
Cash
Flows
As of April 24, 2009, compared to April 25, 2008, our
cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments increased
by $1,439.8 million to $2,604.2 million. The increase
in cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments was
primarily a result of net proceeds from issuance of the Notes
and warrants, cash provided by operating activities, issuance of
common stock related to employee stock option exercises and
employee stock purchases, partially offset by stock repurchases,
execution of the Note Hedge, capital expenditures, and repayment
of the secured revolving credit facility. We derive our
liquidity and capital resources primarily from our cash flow
from operations and from working capital. Working capital
increased by $1,106.1 million to $1,759.5 million as
of April 24, 2009, compared to $653.3 million as of
April 25, 2008.
Cash
Flows from Operating Activities
During fiscal 2009, we generated cash flows from operating
activities of $873.4 million, compared with
$1,008.9 million and $864.5 million for fiscal 2008
and fiscal 2007, respectively. We recorded net income of
$86.5 million for fiscal 2009, compared to
$309.7 million and $297.7 million for fiscal 2008 and
fiscal 2007, respectively. A summary of the significant changes
in noncash adjustments affecting net income and changes in
assets and liabilities impacting operating cash flows is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense was $140.8 million in
fiscal 2009, compared to $148.0 million and
$163.0 million in fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively. The
decrease in stock-based compensation was primarily a result of a
lower fair value of equity awards driven by our declining stock
price.
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense was $170.5 million,
$144.2 million, and $110.8 million in fiscal 2009,
2008 and 2007, respectively. The increase for depreciation was
due to continued capital expansion during fiscal 2009 and 2008.
The increase for amortization expense was due to an increase in
intangibles related to the Onaro acquisition in fiscal 2008,
partially offset by the impairment of certain acquired
intangible assets related to the Topio acquisition in fiscal
2009.
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges and write-offs of $31.6 million
during fiscal 2009 related to impairment of intangibles and
leasehold improvements in connection with our restructuring
plans in fiscal 2009, as well as a write-off related to a sales
force automation tool recorded in fiscal 2009.
|
|
|
|
Impairment losses (gains) on investment consist of
other-than-temporary impairment of $20.3 million related to
investments in Lehman Brothers securities, a decline in the
value of our auction rate securities and impairment losses on
investment in privately held companies during fiscal 2009. A
gain on sale of investments of $12.6 million during fiscal
2008 included sale of Blue Coat common shares of
$13.6 million.
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax provisions of $108.4 million,
$53.0 million and $146.0 million were due to temporary
tax differences associated with such items as accruals, deferred
revenue, stock compensation tax benefits, and net operating
losses and credit carryforwards.
|
|
|
|
The decrease in accounts receivable of $128.7 million
during fiscal 2009 was due to improved collections. The increase
in accounts receivable of $27.7 million and
$175.2 million in fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively, was
due to increased shipment levels weighted towards the end of the
fourth quarter, offset by timing of collections.
|
|
|
|
The decrease in inventories of $9.1 million during fiscal
2009 was due to increased inventory reserves as a result of
lower customer demand due to depressed economic conditions.
Inventories increased $15.4 million in fiscal 2008 due to
higher inventory required to support revenue growth during the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2008. Inventories decreased
$9.9 million for fiscal 2007, primarily due to higher
inventory at fiscal 2006 year end associated with the new
FAS 6000 launch.
|
|
|
|
The increases in deferred revenues of $219.3 million and
$401.0 million during fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively,
were primarily due to increased service contract and software
entitlement and maintenance contract sales, partially offset by
the recognition of previously deferred revenues. An increase in
deferred revenue of $421.3 million in fiscal 2007 was due
to larger installed base renewals for service contracts and
software entitlement and maintenance contracts, upgrades and an
increased number of new enterprise customers purchasing software
entitlement and maintenance contracts.
|
|
|
|
The decrease in accounts payable of $27.0 million during
fiscal 2009 was due to timing of payment activities. The
increase in accounts payable of $20.0 million and
$36.6 million in fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively, was
primarily attributable to elevated purchasing activity required
to support our business growth and facilities expansion projects.
|
|
|
|
The accrual for the GSA settlement of $128.7 million in
fiscal 2009 consisted of the unpaid liability related to that
matter.
|
|
|
|
The increase in accrued compensation and related benefits of
$12.9 million, $18.8 million and $43.6 million in
fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, reflected increased
headcount and the timing of payroll accruals versus payments.
|
Other changes in prepaid expenses, other accrued liabilities,
income taxes payable, and other liabilities balances were due to
timing of payments versus recognition of assets or liabilities.
We expect that cash provided by operating activities may
fluctuate in future periods as a result of a number of factors,
including fluctuations in our operating results, the rate at
which products are shipped during the quarter (which we refer to
as shipment linearity), accounts receivable collections,
inventory and supply chain management, excess tax benefits from
stock-based compensation, and the timing and amount of tax and
other payments.
Cash
Flows from Investing Activities
Capital expenditures for fiscal 2009 were $289.7 million as
compared to $188.3 million and $165.8 million in
fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively. We used $116.8 million
in fiscal 2009 and received $376.4 million and
$187.9 million in fiscal 2008 and 2007, respectively, for
net purchases and redemptions of short-term investments, and
restricted investments. During fiscal 2009, we reclassified
$598.0 million of cash equivalents relating to the Primary
Fund to short-term investments. In fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007,
we received $1.1 million, $19.2 million and
$2.8 million, respectively, from the sale of nonmarketable
and marketable securities. In fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
also used $0.3 million, $4.2 million and
$1.6 million for purchases of nonmarketable and marketable
securities. In fiscal 2008, we acquired Onaro, Inc. and remitted
total cash payments including related transaction costs totaling
$99.6 million and received $0.2 million escrow related
to our Topio acquisition. In fiscal 2007, we acquired Topio,
Inc. and remitted total cash payments including related
transaction costs totaling $131.2 million. In fiscal 2007,
we received $23.9 million in cash in connection with the
sale of certain assets to Blue Coat.
56
Cash
Flows from Financing Activities
We received $696.6 million in fiscal 2009 and used
$662.4 million and $747.3 million in fiscal 2008 and
2007, respectively from financing activities. During fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007, we made repayments of $172.6 million,
$231.5 million and $214.9 million, respectively, in
connection with our Secured Credit Agreement and the Term Loan.
We repurchased 17.0 million, 32.8 million and
22.6 million shares of common stock for a total of
$400.0 million, $903.7 million and $805.7 million
in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Proceeds from
employee stock option exercises and employee stock purchases
were $91.0 million, $114.7 million and
$215.5 million in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Tax benefits, related to tax deductions in excess of stock-based
compensation expense recognized, of $36.7 million,
$45.4 million and $63.2 million for 2009, 2008 and
2007, respectively. During fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
withheld shares with an aggregate value of $5.1 million,
$6.0 million and $5.3 million, respectively, in
connection with the vesting of certain employees
restricted stock units for purposes of satisfying those
employees federal, state, and local withholding tax
obligations. In addition, during fiscal 2009, we issued
$1.265 billion of convertible notes and paid financing
costs of $26.6 million. We also received proceeds of
$163.1 million for sale of common stock warrants, and paid
$254.9 million for purchase of Note Hedges. During fiscal
2008, we borrowed $318.8 million through a Secured Credit
Agreement.
Net proceeds from the issuance of common stock related to
employee participation in employee stock programs have
historically been a significant component of our liquidity. The
extent to which our employees participate in these programs
generally increases or decreases based upon changes in the
market price of our common stock. As a result, our cash flow
resulting from the issuance of common stock in connection with
employee participation in employee stock programs and related
tax benefits will vary.
Stock
Repurchase Program
At April 24, 2009, $1,096.3 million remained available
for future repurchases under plans approved as of that date. The
stock repurchase program may be suspended or discontinued at any
time.
Convertible
Notes
In June 2008, we issued $1.265 billion of
1.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2013 and concurrently
entered into Note Hedges and separate warrant transactions. See
Note 4, Convertible Notes and Credit Facilities
of the consolidated financial statements. The Notes will mature
on June 1, 2013, unless earlier repurchased or converted.
As of April 24, 2009, the Notes have not been repurchased
or converted. We also have not received any shares under the
Note Hedges or delivered cash or shares under the Warrants.
Credit
Facilities
As of April 24, 2009, we have an unsecured revolving credit
facility totaling $250.0 million, of which
$0.6 million has been allocated as of April 24, 2009
to support certain of our outstanding letters of credit (See
Note 4 of the consolidated financial statements.)
This credit facility requires us to maintain specified financial
covenants, with which we were in compliance as of April 24,
2009. Such specified financial covenants include a maximum ratio
of Total Debt to Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation
and Amortization (EBITDA) and a minimum amount of
Unencumbered Cash and Short-Term Investments. Our failure to
comply with these financial covenants could result in a default
under the credit facilities, which would give the counterparties
thereto the ability to exercise certain rights, including the
right to accelerate the amounts outstanding thereunder and to
terminate the facility. We were in compliance with all of our
financial covenants at April 24, 2009.
57
Contractual
Obligations
The following summarizes our contractual obligations at
April 24, 2009 and the effect such obligations are expected
to have on our liquidity and cash flow in future periods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Office operating lease payments(1)
|
|
$
|
28.5
|
|
|
$
|
24.2
|
|
|
$
|
18.3
|
|
|
$
|
15.1
|
|
|
$
|
12.7
|
|
|
$
|
30.2
|
|
|
$
|
129.0
|
|
Real estate lease payments(2)
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
129.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141.1
|
|
Equipment operating lease payments(3)
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34.8
|
|
Venture capital funding commitments(4)
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Purchase commitments with contract manufacturers(5)
|
|
|
83.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83.7
|
|
Capital expenditures(6)
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
Communications and maintenance(7)
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43.5
|
|
1.75% Convertible notes(8)
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
1,276.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,364.5
|
|
Uncertain tax positions(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105.8
|
|
|
|
105.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash Obligations
|
|
$
|
189.0
|
|
|
$
|
75.9
|
|
|
$
|
51.3
|
|
|
$
|
168.2
|
|
|
$
|
1,288.8
|
|
|
$
|
136.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,909.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Letters of credit(10)
|
|
$
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For purposes of the above table, contractual obligations for the
purchase of goods and services are defined as agreements that
are enforceable, are legally binding on us, and subject us to
penalties if we cancel the agreement. Some of the figures we
include in this table are based on managements estimates
and assumptions about these obligations, including their
duration, the possibility of renewal or termination, anticipated
actions by management and third parties, and other factors.
Because these estimates and assumptions are necessarily
subjective, our actual future obligations may vary from those
reflected in the table.
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We enter into operating leases in the normal course of business.
We lease sales offices, research and development facilities, and
other property and equipment under operating leases throughout
the United States and internationally, which expire on various
dates through fiscal year 2019. Substantially all lease
agreements have fixed payment terms based on the passage of time
and contain payment escalation clauses. Some lease agreements
provide us with the option to renew or terminate the associated
lease. Our future operating lease obligations would change if we
were to exercise these options and if we were to enter into
additional operating lease agreements. In addition, facilities
operating lease payments also include the leases that were
impacted by the restructurings described in Note 13 of the
consolidated financial statements. |
|
(2) |
|
Included in real estate lease payments pursuant to four
financing arrangements with BNP Paribas LLC (BNPPLC)
are (i) lease commitments of $3.9 million in each of
the fiscal years 2010, 2011 and 2012; and $2.3 million in
fiscal 2013, which are based on either the LIBOR rate at
April 24, 2009 plus a spread or a fixed rate for terms of
five years, and (ii) at the expiration or termination of
the lease, a supplemental payment obligation equal to our
minimum guarantee of $127.1 million in the event that we
elect not to purchase or arrange for sale of the buildings. See
Note 15 of the consolidated financial statements. |
|
(3) |
|
Equipment operating leases include servers and IT equipment used
in our engineering labs and data centers. |
|
(4) |
|
Venture capital funding commitments include a quarterly
committed management fee based on a percentage of our committed
funding to be payable through June 2011. |
|
(5) |
|
Contract manufacturer commitments consist of obligations for on
hand inventories and non-cancelable purchase order with our
contract manufacturer . We record a liability for firm,
noncancelable, and nonreturnable purchase commitments for
quantities in excess of our future demand forecasts, which is
consistent |
58
|
|
|
|
|
with the valuation of our excess and obsolete inventory. As of
April 24, 2009, the liability for these purchase
commitments in excess of future demand was approximate
$3.2 million and is recorded in other current liabilities. |
|
(6) |
|
Capital expenditures include worldwide contractual commitments
to purchase equipment and to construct building and leasehold
improvements, which will be ultimately recorded as property and
equipment. |
|
(7) |
|
Communication and maintenance represents payments we are
required to make based on minimum volumes under certain
communication contracts with major telecommunication companies
as well as maintenance contracts with multiple vendors. Such
obligations expire in September 2012. |
|
(8) |
|
Included in these amounts is the $1.265 billion
1.75% Notes due 2013 (see Note 4 of the consolidated
financial statements). Estimated interest payments for the Notes
are $99.6 million for fiscal 2009 through fiscal 2014. |
|
(9) |
|
As discussed in Note 6 to the consolidated financial
statements, at April 24, 2009, our liability for uncertain
tax positions was $105.8 million. |
|
(10) |
|
The amounts outstanding under these letters of credit relate to
workers compensation, a customs guarantee, a corporate
credit card program, foreign rent guarantees, and surety bonds,
which were primarily related to self-insurance. |
We have commitments related to four lease arrangements with
BNPPLC for approximately 564,274 square feet of office
space for our headquarters in Sunnyvale, California. As of
April 24, 2009, we have a leasing arrangements
(Leasing Arrangements 1) which requires us to lease
a portion of our land in Sunnyvale to BNPPLC for a period of
99 years and to lease approximately 190,000 square
feet of space costing up to $48.5 million. As of
April 24, 2009, we also have commitments relating to
financing and operating leasing arrangements with BNPPLC
(Leasing Arrangements 2, 3, 4) for land and
approximately 374,274 square feet of buildings located in
Sunnyvale, California, costing up to $101.1 million. Under
these leasing arrangements, we began paying BNPPLC minimum lease
payments, which vary based on LIBOR plus a spread or a fixed
rate on the costs of the facilities on the respective lease
commencement dates. We will make payments for each of the leases
for a term of five years. We have the option to renew each of
the leases for two consecutive five-year periods upon approval
by BNPPLC. Upon expiration (or upon any earlier termination) of
the lease terms, we must elect one of the following options:
(i) purchase the buildings from BNPPLC at cost;
(ii) if certain conditions are met, arrange for the sale of
the buildings by BNPPLC to a third party for an amount equal to
at least 85% of the costs (residual guarantee), and be liable
for any deficiency between the net proceeds received from the
third party and such amounts; or (iii) pay BNPPLC
supplemental payments for an amount equal to at least 85% of the
costs (residual guarantee), in which event we may recoup some or
all of such payments by arranging for a sale of each or all
buildings by BNPPLC during the ensuing two-year period. The
following table summarizes the costs, the residual guarantee,
the applicable LIBOR plus spread or fixed rate at April 24,
2009, and the date we began to make payments for each of our
leasing arrangements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIBOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plus
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
|
Leasing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residual
|
|
|
Spread or
|
|
|
Commencement
|
|
|
|
Arrangements
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Guarantee
|
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
|
Date
|
|
Term
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
48.5
|
|
|
$
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
3.99
|
%
|
|
January 2008
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
80.0
|
|
|
$
|
68.0
|
|
|
|
1.36
|
%
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
10.5
|
|
|
$
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
3.97
|
%
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
10.6
|
|
|
$
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
3.99
|
%
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
All leases require us to maintain specified financial covenants
with which we were in compliance as of April 24, 2009. Such
specified financial covenants include a maximum ratio of Total
Debt to Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and
Amortization (EBITDA) and a minimum amount of
Unencumbered Cash and Short-Term Investments. Our failure to
comply with these financial covenants could result in a default
under the leases which, subject to our right and ability to
exercise our purchase option, would give BNPPLC the right to,
among other things, (i) terminate our possession of the
leased property and require us to pay lease termination damages
and other amounts as set forth in the lease agreements, or
(ii) exercise certain foreclosure remedies. If we were to
exercise our purchase option, or be required to pay lease
termination damages, these payments would significantly reduce
our available liquidity, which could constrain our operating
flexibility.
59
We may from time to time terminate one or more of our leasing
arrangements and repay amounts outstanding in order to meet our
operating or other objectives. For example, on April 1,
2009, we terminated two leasing arrangement in connection with
two buildings located in Sunnyvale, California and Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina and repaid
$119.3 million of the outstanding balance under the leasing
arrangements. On December 1, 2008, we terminated a leasing
arrangement in connection with a separate building located in
Sunnyvale, California and repaid $8.1 million of the
outstanding balance drawn under the construction allowance. As a
result of these terminations, we are no longer contractually
obligated to pay the lease payments for the lease periods and
the residual guarantees.
Legal
Contingencies
On September 5, 2007, we filed a patent infringement
lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas seeking compensatory
damages and a permanent injunction against Sun Microsystems. On
October 25, 2007, Sun Microsystems filed a counter
claim against us in the Eastern District of Texas seeking
compensatory damages and a permanent injunction. On
October 29, 2007, Sun filed a second lawsuit against us in
the Northern District of California asserting additional patents
against us. The Texas court granted a joint motion to transfer
the Texas lawsuit to the Northern District of California on
November 26, 2007. On March 26, 2008, Sun filed a
third lawsuit in federal court that extends the patent
infringement charges to storage management technology we
acquired in January 2008. The three lawsuits are currently in
the discovery phase and no trial date has been set, so we are
unable at this time to determine the likely outcome of these
various patent litigations. In addition, as we are unable to
reasonably estimate the amount or range of the potential
settlement, no accrual has been recorded as of April 24,
2009.
In April 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with the
United States of America, acting through the United States
Department of Justice (DOJ) and on behalf of the
General Services Administration (the GSA), under
which we agreed to pay the United States $128.0 million,
plus interest of $0.7 million, related to a dispute
regarding our discount practices and compliance with the price
reduction clause provisions of GSA contracts between August 1997
and February 2005.
In addition, we are subject to various legal proceedings and
claims which have arisen or may arise in the normal course of
business. While the outcome of these legal matters is currently
not determinable, we do not believe that any current litigation
or claims will have a material adverse effect on our business,
cash flow, operating results, or financial condition.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
During the ordinary course of business, we provide standby
letters of credit or other guarantee instruments to third
parties as required for certain transactions initiated either by
us or our subsidiaries. As of April 24, 2009, our financial
guarantees of $5.9 million that were not recorded on our
balance sheet consisted of standby letters of credit related to
workers compensation, a customs guarantee, a corporate
credit card program, foreign rent guarantees and surety bonds,
which were primarily related to self-insurance.
We use derivative instruments to manage exposures to foreign
currency risk. Our primary objective in holding derivatives is
to reduce the volatility of earnings and cash flows associated
with changes in foreign currency. The program is not designated
for trading or speculative purposes Currently, we do not enter
into any foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge exposures
related to firm commitments or nonmarketable investments. Our
major foreign currency exchange exposures and related hedging
programs are described below:
|
|
|
|
|
We utilize monthly foreign currency forward and options
contracts to hedge exchange rate fluctuations related to certain
foreign monetary assets and liabilities.
|
|
|
|
We use currency forward contracts to hedge exposures related to
forecasted sales denominated in certain foreign currencies.
These contracts are designated as cash flow hedges and in
general closely match the underlying forecasted transactions in
duration.
|
As of April 24, 2009, our notional fair value of foreign
exchange forward and foreign currency option contracts totaled
$314.0 million. We do not believe that these derivatives
present significant credit risks, because the
60
counterparties to the derivatives consist of major financial
institutions, and we manage the notional amount of contracts
entered into with any one counterparty. We do not enter into
derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading
purposes. Other than the risk associated with the financial
condition of the counterparties, our maximum exposure related to
foreign currency forward and option contracts is limited to the
premiums paid.
We have entered into indemnification agreements with third
parties in the ordinary course of business. Generally, these
indemnification agreements require us to reimburse losses
suffered by the third party due to various events, such as
lawsuits arising from patent or copyright infringement. These
indemnification obligations are considered off-balance sheet
arrangements in accordance with FASB Interpretation 45, of
FIN No. 45, Guarantors Accounting and
Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect
Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others.
We have commitments related to four lease arrangements with
BNPPLC for approximately 564,274 square feet of office
space for our headquarters in Sunnyvale, California (as further
described above under Contractual Obligations).
We have evaluated our accounting for these leases under the
provisions of FIN No. 46R and have determined the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
BNPPLC is a leasing company for BNP Paribas in the United
States. BNPPLC is not a special purpose entity
organized for the sole purpose of facilitating the leases to us.
The obligation to absorb expected losses and receive expected
residual returns rests with the parent, BNP Paribas. Therefore,
we are not the primary beneficiary of BNPPLC as we do not absorb
the majority of BNPPLCs expected losses or expected
residual returns; and
|
|
|
|
BNPPLC has represented in the related closing agreements that
the fair value of the property leased to us by BNPPLC is less
than half of the total of the fair values of all assets of
BNPPLC, excluding any assets of BNPPLC held within a silo.
Further, the property leased to NetApp is not held within a
silo. The definition of held within a silo means
that BNPPLC has obtained funds equal to or in excess of 95% of
the fair value of the leased asset to acquire or maintain its
investment in such asset through nonrecourse financing or other
contractual arrangements, the effect of which is to leave such
asset (or proceeds thereof) as the only significant asset of
BNPPLC at risk for the repayment of such funds.
|
Accordingly, under the provisions of FIN No. 46R, we
are not required to consolidate either the leasing entity or the
specific assets that we lease under the BNPPLC lease. Our future
minimum lease payments and residual guarantees under these real
estate leases will amount to a total of $141.1 million as
reported under our Note 15, Commitments and
Contingencies.
We also have operating leases for various facilities. Total
rental expense for operating leases was $28.8 million for
fiscal 2009, $29.6 million for fiscal 2008, and
$24.0 million for fiscal 2007.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
We are exposed to market risk related to fluctuations in
interest rates, market prices, and foreign currency exchange
rates. We use certain derivative financial instruments to manage
these risks. We do not use derivative financial instruments for
speculative or trading purposes. All financial instruments are
used in accordance with management-approved policies.
Market
Risk and Market Interest Risk
Investment and Interest Income As of
April 24, 2009, we had available-for-sale investments of
$1,228.2 million. Our investment portfolio primarily
consists of investments with original maturities at the date of
purchase of greater than three months, which are classified as
available-for-sale. These investments, consisting primarily of
corporate bonds, corporate securities, U.S. government
agency bonds, U.S. Treasuries, certificates of deposit, and
money market funds, are subject to interest rate and interest
income risk and will decrease in value if market interest rates
increase. A hypothetical 10 percent increase in market
interest rates from levels at April 24, 2009 would cause
the fair value of these available-for-sale investments to
decline by approximately $1.6 million.
61
Because we have the ability to hold these investments until
maturity, we would not expect any significant decline in value
of our investments caused by market interest rate changes.
Declines in interest rates over time will, however, reduce our
interest income. We do not use derivative financial instruments
in our investment portfolio.
Our investment policy is to limit credit exposure through
diversification and investment in highly rated securities. We
further mitigate concentrations of credit risk in our
investments by limiting our investments in the debt securities
of a single issuer and by diversifying risk across geographies
and type of issuer. We actively review, along with our
investment advisors, current investment ratings, company
specific events, and general economic conditions in managing our
investments and in determining whether there is a significant
decline in fair value that is other-than-temporary. As a result
of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers, we recorded in
fiscal 2009 an other-than-temporary impairment charge of
$11.8 million on our corporate bonds related to investments
in Lehman Brothers securities and approximately
$9.3 million on our investments in the Reserve Primary
Fund, which also held Lehman Brothers investments. We will
continue to monitor and evaluate the accounting for our
investment portfolio on a quarterly basis for additional
other-than-temporary impairment charges. We could realize
additional losses in our holdings of the Primary Fund and may
not receive all or a portion of our remaining balance in the
Primary Fund as a result of market conditions and ongoing
litigation against the fund.
We are also exposed to market risk relating to our auction rate
securities due to uncertainties in the credit and capital
markets. As of April 24, 2009, we determined there was a
total decline in the fair value of our auction rate securities
investments of approximately $8.8 million, of which we
recorded temporary impairment charges of $7.0 million,
offset by unrealized gains of $0.3 million, and
$2.1 million was recognized as an other-than-temporary
impairment charge. The fair value of our auction rate securities
may change significantly due to events and conditions in the
credit and capital markets. These securities/issuers could be
subject to review for possible downgrade. Any downgrade in these
credit ratings may result in an additional decline in the
estimated fair value of our auction rate securities. Changes in
the various assumptions used to value these securities and any
increase in the markets perceived risk associated with
such investments may also result in a decline in estimated fair
value.
If current market conditions deteriorate further, or the
anticipated recovery in market values does not occur, we may be
required to record additional unrealized losses in other
comprehensive income (loss) or other-than-temporary impairment
charges to earnings in future quarters. We intend and have the
ability to hold these investments until the market recovers. We
do not believe that the lack of liquidity relating to our
portfolio investments will impact our ability to fund working
capital needs, capital expenditures or other operating
requirements. See Note 8, Fair Value
Measurement, to the consolidated financial statements in
Part II, Item 8; Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,
Liquidity and Capital Resources, in Part II,
Item 7; and Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A of
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for a description of recent market events that may affect the
value and liquidity of the investments in our portfolio that we
held at April 24, 2009.
Lease Commitments As of April 24, 2009,
one of our four lease arrangements with BNPPLC is based on a
floating interest rate. The minimum lease payments will vary
based on LIBOR plus a spread. All of our leases have a term of
five years, and we have the option to renew these leases for two
consecutive five-year periods upon approval by BNPPLC. A
hypothetical 10 percent increase in market interest rate
from the level at April 24, 2009 would increase our lease
payments on this one floating lease arrangement under the
initial five-year term by an immaterial amount. We do not
currently hedge against market interest rate increases. As
additional cash flow generated from operations is invested at
current market rates, it will offer a natural hedge against
interest rate risk from our lease commitments in the event of a
significant change in market interest rate.
Convertible Notes In June 2008, we issued
$1.265 billion principal amount of 1.75% Notes due
2013. Holders may convert their Notes prior to maturity upon the
occurrence of certain circumstances. 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, may be paid
in cash or in stock at our option. Concurrent with the issuance
of the Notes, we entered into convertible note hedge
transactions and separately, warrant transactions, to reduce the
potential dilution from the conversion of the Notes and to
mitigate any negative effect such conversion may have on the
price of our common stock.
62
Our Notes have fixed annual interest rates at 1.75% and
therefore, we do not have significant interest rate exposure on
our Notes. However, we are exposed to interest rate risk.
Generally, the fair market value of our fixed interest rate
Notes will increase as interest rates fall and decrease as
interest rates rise. In addition, the fair value of our Notes is
affected by our stock price. The carrying value of our Notes was
$1.265 billion, excluding $22.2 million of deferred
debt issuance costs and total estimated fair value of our
convertible debt at April 24, 2009 was $1.143 billion.
The fair value was determined based on the closing trading price
per $100 of our 1.75% Notes as of the last day of trading
for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, which was $90.38.
Nonmarketable Securities We have from time to
time made cash investments in companies with distinctive
technologies that are potentially strategically important to us.
Our investments in nonmarketable securities would be negatively
affected by an adverse change in equity market prices, although
the impact cannot be directly quantified. Such a change, or any
negative change in the financial performance or prospects of the
companies whose nonmarketable securities we own, would harm the
ability of these companies to raise additional capital and the
likelihood of our being able to realize any gains or return of
our investments through liquidity events such as initial public
offerings, acquisitions, and private sales. These types of
investments involve a high degree of risk, and there can be no
assurance that any company we invest in will grow or be
successful. We do not currently engage in any hedging activities
to reduce or eliminate equity price risk with respect to such
nonmarketable investments. Accordingly, we could lose all or
part of these investments if there is an adverse change in the
market price of a company we invest in. Our investments in
nonmarketable securities had a carrying amount of
$4.0 million as of April 24, 2009 and
$11.2 million as of April 25, 2008. If we determine
that an other-than-temporary decline in fair value exists for a
nonmarketable equity security, we write down the investment to
its fair value and record the related write-down as an
investment loss in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
During fiscal 2009, we recorded net losses of $6.3 million
for our investments in privately held companies.
Foreign
Currency Exchange Rate Risk and Foreign Exchange Forward
Contracts
We hedge risks associated with foreign currency transactions to
minimize the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange
rates on earnings. We utilize forward and option contracts to
hedge against the short-term impact of foreign currency
fluctuations on certain assets and liabilities denominated in
foreign currencies. All balance sheet hedges are marked to
market through earnings every period. We also use foreign
exchange forward contracts to hedge foreign currency forecasted
transactions related to forecasted sales transactions. These
derivatives are designated as cash flow hedges under
SFAS No. 133. For cash flow hedges outstanding at
April 24, 2009, the time-value component is recorded in
earnings while all other gains or losses were included in other
comprehensive income.
We do not enter into foreign exchange contracts for speculative
or trading purposes. In entering into forward and option foreign
exchange contracts, we have assumed the risk that might arise
from the possible inability of counterparties to meet the terms
of their contracts. We attempt to limit our exposure to credit
risk by executing foreign exchange contracts with creditworthy
multinational commercial banks. All contracts have a maturity of
less than one year.
63
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
NetApp, Inc.
Sunnyvale, California
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
NetApp, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively, the
Company) as of April 24, 2009 and
April 25, 2008, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, cash flows, and stockholders equity and
comprehensive income for each of the three years in the period
ended April 24, 2009. Our audits also included the
consolidated financial statement schedule listed in
Item 15. These financial statements and the financial
statement schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
financial statements and the financial statement schedule 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, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
NetApp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of April 24, 2009 and
April 25, 2008, and the results of their operations and
their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
April 24, 2009, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our
opinion, such consolidated financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material
respects, the information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements, in the year ended April 25, 2008, the Company
changed its method of measuring and recognizing tax benefits
associated with uncertain tax positions in accordance with
Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
April 24, 2009, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated June 16, 2009 expressed an
unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over
financial reporting.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
June 16, 2009
64
NETAPP,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except par value)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,494,153
|
|
|
$
|
936,479
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
1,110,053
|
|
|
|
227,911
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $3,068 at
April 24, 2009, and $2,439 at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
446,537
|
|
|
|
582,110
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
61,104
|
|
|
|
70,222
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
119,887
|
|
|
|
123,514
|
|
Short-term deferred income taxes
|
|
|
207,050
|
|
|
|
127,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
3,438,784
|
|
|
|
2,067,433
|
|
Property and Equipment, Net
|
|
|
807,923
|
|
|
|
693,792
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
680,986
|
|
|
|
680,054
|
|
Intangible Assets, Net
|
|
|
45,744
|
|
|
|
90,075
|
|
Long-Term Investments and Restricted Cash
|
|
|
127,317
|
|
|
|
331,105
|
|
Long-Term Deferred Income Taxes and Other Assets
|
|
|
372,065
|
|
|
|
208,529
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,472,819
|
|
|
$
|
4,070,988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
137,826
|
|
|
$
|
178,233
|
|
Accrued compensation and related benefits
|
|
|
204,168
|
|
|
|
202,929
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
190,315
|
|
|
|
154,331
|
|
Accrual for GSA settlement
|
|
|
128,715
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
4,732
|
|
|
|
6,245
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
1,013,569
|
|
|
|
872,364
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
1,679,325
|
|
|
|
1,414,102
|
|
Revolving Credit Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172,600
|
|
1.75% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2013
|
|
|
1,265,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Long-Term Obligations
|
|
|
164,499
|
|
|
|
146,058
|
|
Long-Term Deferred Revenue
|
|
|
701,649
|
|
|
|
637,889
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,810,473
|
|
|
|
2,370,649
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 5,000 shares
authorized; shares outstanding: none in 2009 and 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value; 885,000 shares
authorized; 436,565 shares issued at April 24, 2009,
and 429,080 shares issued at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
437
|
|
|
|
429
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
2,971,995
|
|
|
|
2,690,629
|
|
Treasury stock at cost (104,325 shares at April 24,
2009, and 87,365 shares at April 25, 2008)
|
|
|
(2,927,376
|
)
|
|
|
(2,527,395
|
)
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
1,622,448
|
|
|
|
1,535,903
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
(5,158
|
)
|
|
|
773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,662,346
|
|
|
|
1,700,339
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,472,819
|
|
|
$
|
4,070,988
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
65
NETAPP,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
$
|
2,152,657
|
|
|
$
|
2,242,474
|
|
|
$
|
2,085,898
|
|
Software entitlements and maintenance
|
|
|
618,352
|
|
|
|
486,896
|
|
|
|
341,258
|
|
Service
|
|
|
764,099
|
|
|
|
573,797
|
|
|
|
377,126
|
|
GSA settlement
|
|
|
(128,715
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
3,406,393
|
|
|
|
3,303,167
|
|
|
|
2,804,282
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product
|
|
|
1,007,642
|
|
|
|
938,431
|
|
|
|
838,010
|
|
Cost of software entitlements and maintenance
|
|
|
9,179
|
|
|
|
8,572
|
|
|
|
10,210
|
|
Cost of service
|
|
|
399,657
|
|
|
|
342,788
|
|
|
|
251,562
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of revenues
|
|
|
1,416,478
|
|
|
|
1,289,791
|
|
|
|
1,099,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
1,989,915
|
|
|
|
2,013,376
|
|
|
|
1,704,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
1,186,141
|
|
|
|
1,075,588
|
|
|
|
895,813
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
498,495
|
|
|
|
452,205
|
|
|
|
385,357
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
203,698
|
|
|
|
171,536
|
|
|
|
147,501
|
|
Restructuring and other charges (recoveries)
|
|
|
54,406
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,339
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
1,942,740
|
|
|
|
1,699,776
|
|
|
|
1,403,258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from Operations
|
|
|
47,175
|
|
|
|
313,600
|
|
|
|
301,242
|
|
Other Income (Expenses), Net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
57,610
|
|
|
|
64,610
|
|
|
|
68,837
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(26,865
|
)
|
|
|
(7,990
|
)
|
|
|
(11,642
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on investments, net
|
|
|
(29,571
|
)
|
|
|
12,614
|
|
|
|
(1,538
|
)
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(3,520
|
)
|
|
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
2,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(2,346
|
)
|
|
|
69,099
|
|
|
|
58,486
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Before Income Taxes
|
|
|
44,829
|
|
|
|
382,699
|
|
|
|
359,728
|
|
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes
|
|
|
(41,716
|
)
|
|
|
72,961
|
|
|
|
61,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income
|
|
$
|
86,545
|
|
|
$
|
309,738
|
|
|
$
|
297,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.88
|
|
|
$
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Used in Net Income per Share Calculations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
330,279
|
|
|
|
351,676
|
|
|
|
371,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
334,575
|
|
|
|
361,090
|
|
|
|
388,454
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
66
NETAPP,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
86,545
|
|
|
$
|
309,738
|
|
|
$
|
297,735
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
170,538
|
|
|
|
144,184
|
|
|
|
110,833
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
140,754
|
|
|
|
147,964
|
|
|
|
163,033
|
|
Impairment loss (gain) of investments
|
|
|
20,273
|
|
|
|
(12,614
|
)
|
|
|
1,538
|
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,339
|
)
|
Asset impairment and write-offs
|
|
|
31,573
|
|
|
|
1,841
|
|
|
|
773
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
1,146
|
|
|
|
818
|
|
|
|
928
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(108,371
|
)
|
|
|
(53,031
|
)
|
|
|
(145,989
|
)
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
4,789
|
|
|
|
3,912
|
|
|
|
1,033
|
|
Tax benefit from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
43,855
|
|
|
|
48,195
|
|
|
|
175,036
|
|
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(36,702
|
)
|
|
|
(45,391
|
)
|
|
|
(63,159
|
)
|
Changes in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
128,692
|
|
|
|
(27,741
|
)
|
|
|
(175,231
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
9,126
|
|
|
|
(15,382
|
)
|
|
|
9,908
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
3,596
|
|
|
|
(7,549
|
)
|
|
|
(6,366
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(26,969
|
)
|
|
|
20,031
|
|
|
|
36,589
|
|
Accrued compensation and related benefits
|
|
|
12,874
|
|
|
|
18,754
|
|
|
|
43,612
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
50,295
|
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
16,903
|
|
Accrual for GSA settlement
|
|
|
128,715
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
(1,443
|
)
|
|
|
(47,300
|
)
|
|
|
1,556
|
|
Long term other liabilities
|
|
|
10,643
|
|
|
|
117,469
|
|
|
|
(265
|
)
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
219,301
|
|
|
|
401,014
|
|
|
|
421,328
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
889,230
|
|
|
|
1,008,886
|
|
|
|
864,456
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of investments
|
|
|
(1,152,505
|
)
|
|
|
(1,053,450
|
)
|
|
|
(2,630,350
|
)
|
Redemptions of investments
|
|
|
1,035,722
|
|
|
|
1,429,899
|
|
|
|
2,818,207
|
|
Reclassification from cash and cash equivalents to short-term
investments
|
|
|
(597,974
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in restricted cash
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
(793
|
)
|
|
|
290
|
|
Proceeds from sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,914
|
|
Proceeds from sale of nonmarketable and marketable securities
|
|
|
1,057
|
|
|
|
19,154
|
|
|
|
2,813
|
|
Purchases of nonmarketable securities
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(4,235
|
)
|
|
|
(1,583
|
)
|
Purchases of property and equipment
|
|
|
(289,657
|
)
|
|
|
(188,280
|
)
|
|
|
(165,828
|
)
|
Purchase of businesses, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,390
|
)
|
|
|
(131,241
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(1,003,321
|
)
|
|
|
102,905
|
|
|
|
(83,778
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of common stock related to employee stock
transactions
|
|
|
91,014
|
|
|
|
114,697
|
|
|
|
215,453
|
|
Tax withholding payments reimbursed by restricted stock
|
|
|
(5,115
|
)
|
|
|
(6,020
|
)
|
|
|
(5,272
|
)
|
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
36,702
|
|
|
|
45,391
|
|
|
|
63,159
|
|
Proceeds from revolving credit facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,754
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of convertible notes
|
|
|
1,265,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of financing costs
|
|
|
(26,581
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of common stock warrants
|
|
|
163,059
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of note hedges
|
|
|
(254,898
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of revolving credit facility and debt
|
|
|
(172,600
|
)
|
|
|
(231,510
|
)
|
|
|
(214,890
|
)
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
(399,981
|
)
|
|
|
(903,704
|
)
|
|
|
(805,708
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
696,600
|
|
|
|
(662,392
|
)
|
|
|
(747,258
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of Exchange Rate Changes on Cash and Cash
Equivalents
|
|
|
(24,835
|
)
|
|
|
(1,999
|
)
|
|
|
(5,597
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
557,674
|
|
|
|
447,400
|
|
|
|
27,823
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of period
|
|
|
936,479
|
|
|
|
489,079
|
|
|
|
461,256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period
|
|
$
|
1,494,153
|
|
|
$
|
936,479
|
|
|
$
|
489,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
67
NETAPP,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Balances, April 30, 2006
|
|
|
407,994
|
|
|
$
|
408
|
|
|
$
|
1,872,962
|
|
|
|
(31,996
|
)
|
|
$
|
(817,983
|
)
|
|
$
|
(49,266
|
)
|
|
$
|
928,430
|
|
|
$
|
(11,098
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,923,453
|
|
Components of comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297,735
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,954
|
|
|
|
2,954
|
|
Unrealized gain on investments, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,183
|
|
|
|
15,183
|
|
Unrealized gain on derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,537
|
)
|
|
|
(1,537
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314,335
|
|
Issuance of common stock related to employee transactions
|
|
|
13,308
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
215,439
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
215,453
|
|
Restricted stock awards issued
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock awards cancelled
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units vested
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decru NQ auto exercises
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units exercises
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock withheld for taxes
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,272
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,272
|
)
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22,597
|
)
|
|
|
(805,708
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(805,708
|
)
|
Repurchase of restricted stock Decru
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Assumption of options in connection with acquisition of Topio
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,369
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,369
|
|
Deferred stock compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,266
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock compensation expense employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,356
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,356
|
|
Income tax benefit from employee stock transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,036
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
175,036
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, April 27, 2007
|
|
|
421,623
|
|
|
$
|
422
|
|
|
$
|
2,380,623
|
|
|
|
(54,593
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,623,691
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,226,165
|
|
|
$
|
5,502
|
|
|
$
|
1,989,021
|
|
Components of comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
309,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
309,738
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,111
|
|
|
|
1,111
|
|
Unrealized gain on investments, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,786
|
)
|
|
|
(7,786
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,946
|
|
|
|
1,946
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
305,009
|
|
Issuance of common stock related to employee transactions
|
|
|
7,711
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
114,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114,702
|
|
Restricted stock awards issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock awards cancelled
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units vested
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decru NQ auto exercises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spinnaker restricted stock units exercises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units exercises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock withheld for taxes
|
|
|
(196
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,020
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,020
|
)
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,772
|
)
|
|
|
(903,704
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(903,704
|
)
|
Repurchase of restricted stock & RSA
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Stock compensation expense employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
147,924
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
147,924
|
|
Assumption of options in connection with acquisition of Onaro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
Income tax benefit from employee stock transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,195
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,195
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, April 25, 2008
|
|
|
429,080
|
|
|
$
|
429
|
|
|
$
|
2,690,629
|
|
|
|
(87,365
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,527,395
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,535,903
|
|
|
$
|
773
|
|
|
$
|
1,700,339
|
|
Components of comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,545
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,545
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,764
|
)
|
|
|
(4,764
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on investments, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,986
|
)
|
|
|
(1,986
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
819
|
|
|
|
819
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,614
|
|
Issuance of common stock related to employee transactions
|
|
|
7,770
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
91,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,014
|
|
Restricted stock withheld for taxes
|
|
|
(279
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,115
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,115
|
)
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,960
|
)
|
|
|
(399,981
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(399,981
|
)
|
Repurchase of restricted stock & RSA
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of Note Hedges, net of tax benefits of $102,698
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(152,200
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(152,200
|
)
|
Sale of common stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,059
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,059
|
|
Stock compensation expense employee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,761
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,761
|
|
Income tax benefit from employee stock transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,855
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,855
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances, April 24, 2009
|
|
|
436,565
|
|
|
$
|
437
|
|
|
$
|
2,971,995
|
|
|
|
(104,325
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,927,376
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,622,448
|
|
|
$
|
(5,158
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,662,346
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
68
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Dollar and share amounts in thousands, except per-share
data)
Based in Sunnyvale, California, NetApp, Inc. (we or
the Company) was incorporated in California in
April 1992 and reincorporated in Delaware in November 2001;
in March 2008, the Company changed its name from Network
Appliance, Inc. to NetApp, Inc. The Company is a supplier of
enterprise storage and data management software and hardware
products and services. Our solutions help global enterprises
meet major information technology challenges such as managing
storage growth, assuring secure and timely information access,
protecting data and controlling costs by providing innovative
solutions that simplify the complexity associated with managing
corporate data.
|
|
2.
|
Significant
Accounting Policies
|
Fiscal Year We operate on a 52-week or
53-week year ending on the last Friday in April. Fiscal 2009,
2008 and 2007 were all 52-week fiscal years.
Basis of Presentation The consolidated
financial statements include the Company and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries. Intercompany accounts and transactions are
eliminated in consolidation.
Reclassification In the first quarter of
fiscal 2009, we implemented a change in the reporting of
warranty costs and reported these costs in cost of product
revenues. These costs, which were included in cost of service
revenues in previous periods, amounted to $26,997 and $22,082
for fiscal years 2008 and 2007, respectively, and have been
reclassified on the accompanying financial statements to conform
to current year classification. This change had no effect on the
reported amounts of total costs of revenues, total gross margin,
net income or cash flow from operations for any period presented.
Use of Estimates The preparation of the
consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Such estimates
include, but are not limited to, revenue recognition and
allowances; allowance for doubtful accounts; valuation of
goodwill and intangibles; fair value of derivative instruments
and related hedged items; accounting for income taxes; inventory
valuation and contractual commitments; restructuring accruals;
warranty reserve; impairment losses on investments; fair value
of options granted under our stock-based compensation plans; and
loss contingencies. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Concentration of Credit Risk Financial
instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of
credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents, investments,
foreign exchange contracts and accounts receivable. Cash
equivalents and short-term investments consist primarily of
corporate bonds, U.S. government agency securities, and
money market funds, all of which are considered high investment
grade. Our policy is to limit the amount of credit exposure
through diversification and investment in highly rated
securities. We further mitigate concentrations of credit risk in
our investments by limiting our investments in the debt
securities of a single issuer and by diversifying risk across
geographies and type of issuer.
Our long term investments, including the Primary Fund and
auction rate securities have been and will continue to be
exposed to market risk due to uncertainties in the credit and
capital markets. In fiscal 2009, we recorded an
other-than-temporary impairment charge to earnings of $23,251
related to auction rate securities, Lehman Brothers corporate
bonds and the Primary Fund that held Lehman Brothers investments.
In entering into forward foreign exchange contracts, we have
assumed the risk that might arise from the possible inability of
counterparties to meet the terms of their contracts. The
counterparties to these contracts are major multinational
commercial banks, and we do not expect any losses as a result of
counterparty defaults.
69
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We sell our products primarily to large organizations in
different industries and geographies. We do not require
collateral or other security to support accounts receivable. In
addition, we maintain an allowance for potential credit losses.
To reduce credit risk, we perform ongoing credit evaluations on
our customers financial condition. We establish an
allowance for doubtful accounts based upon factors surrounding
the credit risk of customers, historical trends and other
information and, to date, such losses have been within
managements expectations. No customer represented more
than 10% of accounts receivables in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007.
Concentrations of credit risk with respect to trade accounts
receivable are limited due to the wide variety of customers who
are dispersed across many geographic regions.
Risk and Uncertainties There are no
concentrations of business transacted with a particular market
that would severely impact our business in the near term.
However, we currently rely on a limited number of suppliers for
certain key components and a few key contract manufacturers to
manufacture most of our products; any disruption or termination
of these arrangements could materially adversely affect our
operating results.
Comprehensive Income
(Loss) Comprehensive income (loss) is
defined as the change in equity during a period from nonowner
sources. Comprehensive income consists of net income and other
comprehensive income (loss), which is a separate component of
stockholders equity. Other comprehensive income (loss)
includes foreign currency translation adjustments, unrealized
gain, and losses on derivatives and unrealized gains and losses
on our available-for-sale securities, which includes a temporary
impairment charge of $7,037 and $3,500 in fiscal 2009 and 2008,
respectively, associated with our auction rate securities. Refer
to Note 3 for further discussion regarding this unrealized
loss.
Other comprehensive income (loss) for fiscal years 2009, 2008
and 2007 has been disclosed within the consolidated statement of
stockholders equity and comprehensive income.
The components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
at the end of each fiscal year, were as follows (net of related
tax effects):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Accumulated translation adjustments
|
|
$
|
(332
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,432
|
|
|
$
|
3,321
|
|
Accumulated unrealized gain (loss) on available-for-sale
investments
|
|
|
(4,303
|
)
|
|
|
(2,317
|
)
|
|
|
5,469
|
|
Accumulated unrealized loss on derivatives
|
|
|
(523
|
)
|
|
|
(1,342
|
)
|
|
|
(3,288
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(5,158
|
)
|
|
$
|
773
|
|
|
$
|
5,502
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents We consider all
highly liquid debt investments with original maturities of three
months or less at time of purchase to be cash equivalents.
Marketable Securities As of April 24,
2009 and April 25, 2008, our short-term and long-term
investments in marketable securities have been classified as
available-for-sale and are carried at fair value.
Available-for-sale investments with original maturities of
greater than three months at the date of purchases are
classified as short-term investments as these investments
generally consist of highly marketable securities that are
intended to be available to meet current cash requirements.
Currently, all marketable securities held by us are classified
as available-for-sale and our entire auction rate securities
(ARS) portfolio and our investment in the Reserve Primary Fund
(Primary Fund) are classified as long-term
investments.
Our ARS are securities with long-term nominal maturities which,
in accordance with investment policy guidelines, had credit
ratings of AAA and Aaa at the time of purchase. During the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, we reclassified all of our
investments in ARS from short-term investments to long-term
investments as we believed our ability to liquidate these
investments in the next twelve months was uncertain. Based on an
analysis of the fair value and marketability of these
investments, we recorded temporary impairment charges of
approximately $7,037 during fiscal 2009, partially offset by
$296 in unrealized gains within other comprehensive income
(loss). During fiscal
70
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary impairment loss of
$2,122 due to a significant decline in the estimated fair values
of certain of our ARS related to credit quality risk and rating
downgrades.
As a result of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers, which
occurred during fiscal 2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary
impairment charge of $11,831 on our corporate bonds related to
investments in Lehman Brothers securities and approximately
$9,298 on our investments in the Primary Fund that held
Lehman Brothers investments. As of April 24, 2009, we
have an investment in the Primary Fund, an AAA-rated money
market fund at the time of purchase, with a par value of $60,928
and an estimated fair value of $51,630, which suspended
redemptions in September 2008 and is in the process of
liquidating its portfolio of investments. On December 3,
2008, it announced a plan for liquidation and distribution of
assets that includes the establishment of a special reserve to
be set aside out of its assets for pending or threatened claims,
as well as anticipated costs and expenses, including related
legal and accounting fees. On February 26, 2009, the
Primary Fund announced a plan to set aside $3,500,000 of the
funds remaining assets as the special reserve
which may be increased or decreased as further information
becomes available. Our pro rata share of the $3,500,000 special
reserve is approximately $41,455. The Primary Fund announced
plans to continue to make periodic distributions, up to the
amount of the special reserve, on a pro-rata basis. The Primary
Fund has received an United States Security Exchange Commission
order providing that the SEC will supervise the distribution of
assets from the Primary Fund. We could realize additional losses
in our holdings of the Primary Fund and may not receive all or a
portion of our remaining balance in the Primary Fund as a result
of market conditions and ongoing litigation against the fund.
During fiscal 2008 and 2007, recognized gains and losses on
available-for-sale investments were not material. Management
determines the appropriate classification of debt and equity
securities at the time of purchase and reevaluates the
classification at each reporting date. The fair value of our
marketable securities, including those included in long-term
investments, was $1,228,220 and $543,226 as of April 24,
2009 and April 25, 2008, respectively.
Investments in Nonpublic Companies We have
certain investments in nonpublicly- traded companies in which we
have less than 20% of the voting rights and in which we do not
exercise significant influence and accordingly, we account for
these investments under the cost method. As of April 24,
2009 and April 25, 2008, $3,969 and $11,169 of these
investments are included in long-term investments on the
accompanying balance sheet. We perform periodic reviews of our
investments for impairment. During fiscal 2009, we recorded a
loss of $6,320 related to our investments in privately held
companies.
Other-than-temporary Impairment All of our
available-for-sale investments and nonmarketable equity
securities are subject to a periodic impairment review.
Investments are considered to be impaired when a decline in fair
value is judged to be other-than-temporary. This determination
requires significant judgment. For publicly traded investments,
impairment is determined based upon the specific facts and
circumstances present at the time, including factors such as
current economic and market conditions, the credit rating of the
securitys issuer, the length of time an investments
fair value has been below our carrying value, the extent to
which fair value was below cost, and our ability and intent to
hold investments for a period of time sufficient to allow for
anticipated recovery in value. If an investments decline
in fair value, caused by factors other than changes in interest
rates, is deemed to be other-than-temporary, we reduce its
carrying value to its estimated fair value, as determined based
on quoted market prices or liquidation values. Declines in value
judged to be other-than-temporary, if any, are recorded in
operations as incurred. For long-term investments, such as
auction rate securities, impairment is determined based on fair
value and marketability of these investments. The valuation
models we used to estimate fair value included numerous
assumptions such as assessments of the underlying structure of
each security, expected cash flows, discount rates, credit
ratings, workout periods, and overall capital market liquidity.
For nonmarketable equity securities, the impairment analysis
requires the identification of events or circumstances that
would likely have a significant adverse effect on the fair value
of the investment, including revenue and earnings trends,
overall business prospects, dilution of valuation due to new
financing, limited capital resources, limited prospects of
receiving additional
71
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
financing, limited prospects for liquidity of the related
securities and general market conditions in the investees
industry.
Inventories Inventories are stated at the
lower of cost or market, which approximates actual cost on a
first-in,
first out basis. We write down inventory and record purchase
commitment liabilities for excess and obsolete inventory equal
to the difference between the cost of inventory and the
estimated fair value based upon assumptions about future demand
and market conditions.
Property and Equipment Property and equipment
are recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
assets, which range from three to five years. The land at our
Sunnyvale, California headquarters site and at Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina, is not depreciated. Leasehold improvements
are amortized over the shorter of the estimated useful lives of
the assets or the remaining term of the lease. Buildings and
building improvements are amortized over the estimated lives of
the assets, which range from 10 to 40 years. Construction
in progress will be amortized over the estimated useful lives of
the respective assets when they are ready for their intended use.
We review the carrying values of long-lived assets whenever
events and circumstances indicate that the net book value of an
asset may not be recovered through expected future cash flows
from its use and eventual disposition. The amount of impairment
loss, if any, is measured as the difference between the net book
value and the estimated fair value of the asset.
Goodwill and Purchased Intangible Assets
Goodwill is recorded when the consideration paid for an
acquisition exceeds the fair value of net tangible and
intangible assets acquired. Acquisition-related intangible
assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their
economic lives of five years for patents, four to five years for
existing technology, 18 months to eight years for customer
relationships and two to seven years for trademarks and
tradenames as we believe this method would most closely reflect
the pattern in which the economic benefits of the assets will be
consumed.
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets,
(SFAS No. 142) goodwill is measured and
tested on an annual basis in the fourth quarter of our fiscal
year or more frequently if we believe indicators of impairment
exist. Triggering events for impairment reviews may be
indicators such as adverse industry or economic trends,
restructuring actions, lower projections of profitability, or a
sustained decline in our market capitalization. The performance
of the test involves a two-step process. The first step requires
comparing the fair value of the reporting unit to its net book
value, including goodwill. We have one reporting unit, the fair
value of which is determined to equal our market capitalization
as determined through quoted market prices. A potential
impairment exists if the fair value of the reporting unit is
lower than its net book value. The second step of the process is
only performed if a potential impairment exists, and it involves
determining the difference between the fair value of the
reporting units net assets other than goodwill to the fair
value of the reporting unit and if the difference is less than
the net book value of goodwill an impairment exists and is
recorded. We have not been required to perform this second step
of the process since its adoption of SFAS No. 142
because the fair value of the reporting unit has exceeded the
net book value at every measurement date.
Long-Lived Assets We account for
long-lived assets, including other purchased intangible assets
acquired in business combinations, in accordance with
SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,
(SFAS No. 144), which requires impairment
losses to be recorded on long-lived assets used in operations
when indicators of impairment, such as reductions in demand,
lower projections of profitability, significant changes in the
manner of our use of acquired assets, or significant negative
industry or economic trends are present. Reviews are performed
to determine whether the carrying value of an asset is impaired,
based on comparisons to undiscounted expected future cash flows.
If this comparison indicates that there is impairment, the
impaired asset is written down to fair value, which is typically
calculated using: (i) quoted market prices
and/or
(ii) discounted expected future cash flows utilizing a
discount rate consistent with the guidance provided in FASB
Concepts Statement No. 7, Using Cash Flow
Information and Present Value in Accounting
Measurements.
72
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Impairment is based on the excess of the carrying amount over
the fair value of those assets. We estimate regarding future
anticipated net revenue and cash flows, the remaining economic
life of the products and technologies, or both, may differ from
those used to assess the recoverability of assets. In that
event, impairment charges or shortened useful lives of certain
long-lived assets may be required, resulting in a reduction in
net income or an increase to net loss in the period when such
determinations are made. Due to the recent negative economic
trends, we tested our long-lived assets for impairment as of
April 24, 2009 and determined they were not impaired,
except for an impairment charge of intangibles of $14,917 in
fiscal 2009 related to our decision to cease development and
availability of a certain product.
Revenue Recognition We apply the provisions
of Statement of Position (SOP)
No. 97-2,
Software Revenue Recognition, and related
interpretations to our product sales, both hardware and
software, because our software is essential to the performance
of our hardware. We recognize revenue when:
|
|
|
|
|
Persuasive evidence of an arrangement
exists: It is our customary practice to have a
purchase order
and/or
contract prior to recognizing revenue on an arrangement from our
end users, customers, value-added resellers, or distributors.
|
|
|
|
Delivery has occurred: Our product is
physically delivered to our customers, generally with standard
transfer terms such as FOB origin. We typically do not allow for
restocking rights with any of our value- added resellers or
distributors. Products shipped with acceptance criteria or
return rights are not recognized as revenue until all criteria
are achieved. If undelivered products or services exist that are
essential to the functionality of the delivered product in an
arrangement, delivery is not considered to have occurred.
|
|
|
|
The fee is fixed or determinable: Arrangements
with payment terms extending beyond our standard terms,
conditions, and practices are not considered to be fixed or
determinable. Revenue from such arrangements is recognized as
the fees become due and payable. We typically do not allow for
price-protection rights with any of our value-added resellers or
distributors.
|
|
|
|
Collection is probable: Probability of
collection is assessed on a
customer-by-customer
basis. Customers are subjected to a credit review process that
evaluates the customers financial position and ultimately
their ability to pay. If it is determined at the outset of an
arrangement that collection is not probable based upon our
review process, revenue is recognized upon cash receipt.
|
Our multiple element arrangements include our systems and one or
more of the following undelivered software-related elements:
software entitlements and maintenance, premium hardware
maintenance, and storage review services. Our software
entitlements and maintenance entitle our customers to receive
unspecified product upgrades and enhancements on a
when-and-if-available
basis, bug fixes, and patch releases. Premium hardware
maintenance services include contracts for technical support and
minimum response times. Revenues from software entitlements and
maintenance, premium hardware maintenance services and storage
review services are recognized ratably over the contractual
term, generally from one to three years. We also offer extended
service contracts (which extend our standard parts warranty and
may include premium hardware maintenance) at the end of the
warranty term; revenues from these contracts are recognized
ratably over the contract term. We typically sell technical
consulting services separately from any of our other revenue
elements, either on a time and materials basis or for fixed
price standard projects; we recognize revenue for these services
as they are performed. Revenue from hardware installation
services is recognized at the time of delivery and any remaining
costs are accrued, as the remaining undelivered services are
considered to be inconsequential and perfunctory. For
arrangements with multiple elements, we recognize as revenue the
difference between the total arrangement price and the greater
of fair value or stated price for any undelivered elements
(the residual method).
For our undelivered software-related elements, we apply the
provisions of
SOP No. 97-2
and determine fair value of these undelivered elements based on
vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE), which for
us consists of the prices charged when these services are sold
separately either alone, in the case of software entitlements
and maintenance, or as a bundled element which always includes
software entitlements and maintenance and premium
73
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
hardware maintenance, and may also include storage review
services. To determine the fair value of these elements, we
analyze both the selling prices when elements are sold
separately as well as the concentrations of those prices. We
believe those concentrations have been sufficient to enable us
to establish VSOE of fair value for the undelivered elements. If
VSOE cannot be obtained to establish fair value of the
undelivered elements, paragraph 12 of
SOP No. 97-2
would require that revenue from the entire arrangement be
initially deferred and recognized ratably over the period these
elements are delivered.
For purposes of presentation in the statement of operations,
once fair value has been determined for our undelivered bundled
elements, we allocate revenue first to software entitlements and
maintenance, based on VSOE of its fair value with the remainder
allocated to other service revenues.
We record reductions to revenue for estimated sales returns at
the time of shipment. Sales returns are estimated based on
historical sales returns, current trends, and our expectations
regarding future experience. We monitor and analyze the accuracy
of sales returns estimates by reviewing actual returns and
adjust them for future expectations to determine the adequacy of
our current and future reserve needs. If actual future returns
and allowances differ from past experience, additional
allowances may be required.
We also maintain a separate allowance for doubtful accounts for
estimated losses based on our assessment of the collectibility
of specific customer accounts and the aging of our accounts
receivable. We analyze accounts receivable and historical bad
debts, customer concentrations, customer solvency, current
economic and geographic trends, and changes in customer payment
terms and practices when evaluating the adequacy of the
allowance for doubtful accounts. Our allowance for doubtful
accounts as of April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, was
$3,068, and $2,439, respectively. If the financial condition of
our customers deteriorates, resulting in an impairment of their
ability to make payments, additional allowances may be required.
Deferred Revenues Deferred revenues consist
primarily of amounts related to software entitlements and
maintenance, service contracts and other service described in
revenue recognition above.
Software Development Costs The costs for the
development of new software products and substantial
enhancements to existing software products are expensed as
incurred until technological feasibility has been established,
at which time any additional costs would be capitalized in
accordance with SFAS No. 86, Accounting for
the Costs of Software to Be Sold, Leased, or Otherwise
Marketed. Because we believe our current process for
developing software is essentially completed concurrently with
the establishment of technological feasibility, which occurs
upon the completion of a working model, no costs have been
capitalized for any of the periods presented. In accordance with
SOP No. 98-1,
Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed
or Obtained for Internal Use, the cost of internally
developed software is capitalized and included in property and
equipment at the point at which the conceptual formulation,
design, and testing of possible software project alternatives
have been completed and management authorizes and commits to
funding the project. Projects where expected future economic
benefits are less than probable are not capitalized. Internally
developed software costs include the cost of software tools and
licenses used in the development of our systems, as well as
consulting costs. Completed projects are transferred to property
and equipment at cost and are amortized on a straight-line basis
over their estimated useful lives, generally three years. We did
not capitalize any software development costs in fiscal 2009,
2008 or 2007.
Income Taxes Deferred income tax assets and
liabilities are provided for temporary differences that will
result in future tax deductions or income in future periods, as
well as the future benefit of tax credit carryforwards. A
valuation allowance reduces tax assets to their estimated
realizable value.
Determining the liability for uncertain tax positions requires
us to make significant estimates and judgments as to whether,
and the extent to which, additional taxes may be due based on
potential tax audit issues in the U.S. and other tax
jurisdictions throughout the world. Our estimates are based on
the outcomes of previous audits, as well as the precedents set
in cases in which others have taken similar tax positions to
those taken by us. If we later determine
74
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
that our exposure is lower or that the liability is not
sufficient to cover our revised expectations, we adjust the
liability and effect a related change in our tax provision
during the period in which we make such a determination.
Effective April 28, 2007, we adopted Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation
(FIN) No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109. FIN No. 48
prescribes a comprehensive model for how a company should
recognize, measure, present, and disclose in its financial
statements uncertain tax positions that we have taken or expect
to take on a tax return (including a decision whether to file or
not to file a return in a particular jurisdiction).
FIN No. 48 is applicable to all uncertain tax
positions for taxes accounted for under SFAS No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes, and
substantially changes the applicable accounting model. There was
no cumulative effect from the adoption of FIN No. 48.
As a result of the implementation of FIN No. 48, we
recognize the tax liability for uncertain income tax positions
on the income tax return based on the two-step process
prescribed in the interpretation. The first step is to determine
whether it is more likely than not that each income tax position
would be sustained upon audit. The second step is to estimate
and measure the tax benefit as the amount that has a greater
than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement
with the tax authority. Estimating these amounts requires us to
determine the probability of various possible outcomes. We
evaluate these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis. See
Note 6, Income Taxes, for further discussion.
Foreign Currency Translation For subsidiaries
whose functional currency is the local currency, gains and
losses resulting from translation of these foreign currency
financial statements into U.S. dollars are recorded within
stockholders equity and comprehensive income as part of
accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). For subsidiaries
where the functional currency is the U.S. dollar, gains and
losses resulting from the process of remeasuring foreign
currency financial statements into U.S. dollars are
included in other income (expenses), net.
Derivative Instruments We follow
SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities as amended.
Derivatives that are not designated as hedges are adjusted to
fair value through earnings. If the derivative is designated as
a hedge, depending on the nature of the exposure being hedged,
changes in fair value will either be offset against the change
in fair value of the hedged items through earnings or recognized
within stockholders equity and comprehensive income (loss)
until the hedged item is recognized in earnings. The ineffective
portion of the hedge is recognized in earnings immediately. For
all periods presented, realized gains and losses on the
ineffective portion of our hedges were not material.
As a result of our significant international operations, we are
subject to risks associated with fluctuating exchange rates. We
use derivative financial instruments, principally currency
forward contracts and currency options, to attempt to minimize
the impact of exchange rate movements on our balance sheet and
operating results. Factors that could have an impact on the
effectiveness of our hedging program include the accuracy of
forecasts and the volatility of foreign currency markets. These
programs reduce, but do not always entirely eliminate, the
impact of currency exchange movements. The maturities of these
instruments are generally less than one year.
Currently, we do not enter into any foreign exchange forward
contracts to hedge exposures related to firm commitments or
nonmarketable investments.
Net Income per Share Basic net income per
share is computed by dividing income available to common
stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding, excluding common shares subject to repurchase for
that period. Diluted net income per share is computed giving
effect to all dilutive potential shares that were outstanding
during the period. Dilutive potential common shares consist of
incremental common shares subject to repurchase and common
shares issuable upon exercise of stock options, employee stock
purchase plan (ESPP), warrants, and restricted stock
awards.
Certain awards outstanding, representing 61,050, 39,302, and
22,827 shares of common stock, have been excluded from the
diluted net income per share calculations for fiscal 2009, 2008
and 2007, respectively, because their effect would have been
antidilutive as these options exercise prices were above
the average market prices in
75
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
such periods. Diluted shares outstanding do not include any
effect resulting from the conversion of our Notes issued in June
2008, warrants and ESPP shares as their impact would be
anti-dilutive for all periods presented.
As of April 24, 2009, we have repurchased
104,325 shares of our common stock under various stock
repurchase programs since inception of the repurchase programs
in May 2003. Such repurchased shares are held as treasury stock
and our outstanding shares used to calculate earnings per share
have been reduced by the weighted number of repurchased shares.
The following is a reconciliation of the numerators and
denominators of the basic and diluted net income per share
computations for the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Net Income (Numerator):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income, basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
86,545
|
|
|
$
|
309,738
|
|
|
$
|
297,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares (Denominator):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
330,391
|
|
|
|
351,876
|
|
|
|
371,628
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding subject to repurchase
|
|
|
(112
|
)
|
|
|
(200
|
)
|
|
|
(424
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in basic computation
|
|
|
330,279
|
|
|
|
351,676
|
|
|
|
371,204
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding subject to repurchase
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
424
|
|
Diluted weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
4,184
|
|
|
|
9,214
|
|
|
|
16,826
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares used in diluted computation
|
|
|
334,575
|
|
|
|
361,090
|
|
|
|
388,454
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.88
|
|
|
$
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
$
|
0.86
|
|
|
$
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-Based Compensation We account for
stock-based compensation expense in accordance with
SFAS No. 123R, Share-Based
Payment (SFAS No. 123R), which
requires us to measure and recognize compensation expense for
all stock-based payments awards, including employee stock
options, restricted stock units and rights to purchase shares
under our ESPP, based on their estimated fair value, and to
recognize the costs in our financial statements over the
employees requisite service period. Total stock-based
compensation expense recognized in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007
was $140,754, $147,964 and $163,033, respectively.
The fair value of employee restricted stock units is equal to
the market value of our common stock on the date the award is
granted. Calculating the fair value of employee stock options
and the rights to purchase shares under the ESPP requires
estimates and significant judgment. We use the Black-Scholes
option pricing model to estimate the fair value of these awards,
consistent with the provisions of SFAS No. 123R. The
fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of
grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, and is not
remeasured as a result of subsequent stock price fluctuations.
Option-pricing models require the input of highly subjective
assumptions, including the expected term of options, the
expected price volatility of the stock underlying such options
and forfeiture rate. Our expected term assumption is based
primarily on historical exercise and post-vesting forfeiture
experience. Our stock price volatility assumption is based on an
implied volatility of call options and dealer quotes on call
options, generally having a term of greater than twelve months.
Changes in the subjective assumptions required in the valuation
models may significantly affect the estimated value of our
stock-based awards, the related stock-based compensation expense
and, consequently, our results of operations. Likewise, the
shortening of the
76
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
contractual life of our options could change the estimated
exercise behavior in a manner other than currently expected.
In addition, SFAS 123R requires that we estimate the number
of stock-based awards that will be forfeited due to employee
turnover. Our forfeiture assumption is based primarily on
historical experience. Changes in the estimated forfeiture rate
can have a significant effect on reported stock-based
compensation expense, as the effect of adjusting the rate for
all expense amortization after April 28, 2006 is recognized
in the period the forfeiture estimate is changed. If the actual
forfeiture rate is higher than the estimated forfeiture rate,
then an adjustment will be made to increase the estimated
forfeiture rate, which will result in a decrease to the expense
recognized in the financial statements. If the actual forfeiture
rate is lower than the estimated forfeiture rate, then an
adjustment will be made to lower the estimated forfeiture rate,
which will result in an increase to the expense recognized in
our financial statements. The expense we recognize in future
periods will be affected by changes in the estimated forfeiture
rate and may differ significantly from amounts recognized in the
current period
and/or our
forecasts.
Statements of Cash Flows Supplemental cash
flows and noncash investing and financing activities are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
$
|
26,264
|
|
|
$
|
29,307
|
|
|
$
|
38,941
|
|
Income tax refunds
|
|
|
10,143
|
|
|
|
2,202
|
|
|
|
4,237
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
|
12,672
|
|
|
|
8,082
|
|
|
|
10,584
|
|
Noncash Investing and Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of property and equipment on account
|
|
|
13,152
|
|
|
|
27,280
|
|
|
|
11,226
|
|
Reclassification of restricted investments
|
|
|
81,023
|
|
|
|
375,981
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options assumed for acquired businesses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
|
|
8,369
|
|
Common stocks received from sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,637
|
|
Recently Issued Accounting Standards In April
2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS No. 107-1
and APB
No. 28-1,
Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments (FSP
FAS No. 107-1
and APB
No. 28-1).
FSP
FAS No. 107-1
and APB
No. 28-1
require disclosures about the fair value of financial
instruments for annual and interim reporting periods of publicly
traded companies. FSP
FAS No. 107-1
and APB
No. 28-1
are effective in reporting periods ending after June 15,
2009, and are required to be adopted by us beginning in the
first quarter of fiscal 2010. We do not expect the adoption of
this FSP to have any impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
FAS No. 124-2,
Recognition and Presentation of Other-Than Temporary
Investments (FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
No. 124-2).
FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
No. 124-2
amends the other-than-temporary impairment guidance for debt
securities. Under FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
No. 124-2,
the pre-existing intent and ability trigger was
modified such that an other-than-temporary impairment is now
triggered when there is intent to sell the security, it is more
likely than not that the security will be required to be sold
before recovery in value, or the security is not expected to
recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. Credit
related losses on debt securities will be considered an
other-than-temporary impairment recognized in earnings, and any
other losses due to a decline in fair value relative to the
amortized cost deemed not to be other-than-temporary will be
recorded in other comprehensive income. FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
No. 124-2
are effective in reporting periods ending after June 15,
2009, and are required to be adopted by our beginning in the
first quarter of fiscal 2010. We are currently evaluating the
impact of the adoption of FSP
FAS No. 115-2
and
No. 124-2
will have on our consolidated financial statements.
77
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In April 2009, the FASB issued FSP
FAS No. 157-4,
Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of
Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased
and Identifying Transactions That Are Not Orderly
(FSP
FAS No. 157-4),
which provides guidance on how to determine the fair value of
assets and liabilities under SFAS 157 Fair Value
Measurements, in the current economic environment and
reemphasizes that the objective of a fair value measurement
remains the determination of an exit price. If we were to
conclude that there has been a significant decrease in the
volume and level of activity of the asset or liability in
relation to normal market activities, quoted market values may
not be representative of fair value and we may conclude that a
change in valuation technique or the use of multiple valuation
techniques may be appropriate. We do not expect the adoption of
FSP
FAS No. 157-4
will have a material impact on our consolidated financial
statements.
In January 2009, the FASB issued FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1,
Amendments to the Impairment Guidance of EITF Issue
No. 99-20
(FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1).
FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1
amends the impairment guidance under
EITF 99-20
to be consistent with guidance under FASB No. 115. FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1
removes the reference to market participants when a company
determines impairment of a security under the expected future
cash flows. FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1
requires the company to recognize other-than temporary
impairment as a realized loss through earnings when it is
probable that there has been an adverse change in estimated cash
flows from the cash flows previously projected. The company must
also consider all available information when developing the
estimate of future cash flows. This FSP was effective for
interim and annual periods ending after December 15, 2008.
The adoption of FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1
did not have a material impact on our financial position or
results of operations.
In October 2008, the FASB issued FSP
No. 157-3,
Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When
the Market for That Asset Is Not Active (FSP
No. 157-3).
FSP
No. 157-3
clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements, which we adopted as
of July 26, 2008, in situations where the market is not
active. We have considered the guidance provided by FSP
No. 157-3
in our determination of estimated fair values as of
April 24, 2009, and the impact was not material.
In September 2008, the FASB issued FSP
No. SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4,
Disclosures About Credit Derivatives and Certain
Guarantees An Amendment of FASB Statement
No. 133 and FASB Interpretation No. 45; and
Clarification of the Effective Date of FASB Statement
No. 161 (FSP
SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4).
FSP
SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4
amend FASB Statement No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, to
require disclosures by sellers of credit derivatives, including
credit derivatives embedded in a hybrid instrument. FSP
SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4
also amends FASB Interpretation No. 45,
Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements
for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of
Others, to require an additional disclosure about the
current status of the payment/performance risk of a guarantee.
Further, FSP
SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4
clarify the Boards intent about the effective date of FASB
Statement No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities. The effective date for
disclosures required by Statement No. 161 was
April 24, 2009. The adoption of FSP
SFAS 133-1
and
FIN 45-4
only resulted in additional disclosure and did not have an
impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In June 2008, the FASB issued EITF Issue
No. 07-5,
Determining Whether an Instrument (or Embedded Feature)
Is Indexed to an Entitys Own Stock (EITF
No. 07-5).
EITF
No. 07-5
provides guidance on determining whether an equity-linked
financial instrument, or embedded feature, is indexed to an
entitys own stock. EITF
No. 07-5
is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods
within those fiscal years. We do not believe that the adoption
EITF
No. 07-5
will have a material impact on our financial position results of
operations.
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162,
The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (SFAS No. 162).
SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of accounting
principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be
used in the preparation of financial statements that are
presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States. This standard was effective
beginning November 15, 2008. The adoption of
SFAS No. 162 did not have a material impact on our
financial position or results of operations.
78
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In May 2008, the FASB issued FSP APB
No. 14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May Be
Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (FSP APB
No. 14-1.)
FSP APB
No. 14-1
requires that the liability and equity components of convertible
debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion
(including partial cash settlement) be separately accounted for
in a manner that reflects an issuers non-convertible debt
borrowing rate. Upon adoption of FSP APB
No. 14-1,
we will be required to allocate a portion of the proceeds
received from the June 2008 issuance of our convertible notes
between a liability component and equity component by
determining the fair value of the liability component using our
non-convertible debt borrowing rate. The difference between the
proceeds of the notes and the fair value of the liability
component will be recorded as a discount on our convertible
notes with a corresponding offset to paid-in capital (the equity
component). The resulting discount will be accreted by recording
additional non-cash interest expense over the expected life of
the convertible notes using the effective interest rate method.
Although the adoption of FSP APB
No. 14-1
will have no impact on our past or future cash flows, it will
require us to record a significant amount of non-cash interest
expense as the debt discount is amortized. We will adopt FSP APB
No. 14-1
in our first quarter of fiscal 2010. FSP APB
No. 14-1
is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods
within those fiscal years, and must be applied on a
retrospective basis. Accordingly, commencing with the filing of
our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended July 31, 2009, our historical
financial statements will be adjusted to give effect to FSP APB
No. 14-1.
Due to the retrospective application, the notes will reflect a
lower principal balance and additional non-cash interest expense
based on our non-convertible debt borrowing rate. We estimate
that the retrospective adoption of FSP APB
No. 14-1
will reduce fiscal 2009 convertible long-term debt by
approximately $221,000, increase stockholders equity by
approximately $157,000 as of April 24, 2009, and that it
will increase non-cash interest expense and decrease income
before income taxes by approximately $39,000, decrease net
income by approximately $15,800, and reduce both basic and
diluted earnings per share by approximately $0.05 for fiscal
2009. Further, we expect to incur related non-cash interest
expense of approximately $46,000 for fiscal 2010. Upon adoption
of FSP APB
No. 14-1,
we will record certain deferred tax liabilities relating to the
debt discount which can be offset against deferred tax assets
related to our Note Hedge.
In April 2008, the FASB issued FSP
No. 142-3,
Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible
Assets (FSP
No. 142-3).
FSP
No. 142-3
amends the factors that should be considered in developing
renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful
life of a recognized intangible asset under
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. The intent of the position is to improve the
consistency between the useful life of a recognized intangible
asset under SFAS No. 142 and the period of expected
cash flows used to measure the fair value of the intangible
asset. FSP
No. 142-3
is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008. The adoption FSP
No. 142-3
may impact any intangibles the Company acquires in future
transactions.
In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161,
Disclosures About Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities An Amendment of FASB Statement
No. 133 (SFAS No. 161).
SFAS No. 161 requires additional disclosures about the
objectives of using derivative instruments, the method by which
the derivative instruments and related hedged items are
accounted for under FASB Statement No. 133 and its related
interpretations, and the effect of derivative instruments and
related hedged items on financial position, financial
performance, and cash flows. SFAS No. 161 also
requires disclosure of the fair value of derivative instruments
and their gains and losses in a tabular format. This statement
was effective for our fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. Since
SFAS No. 161 only requires additional disclosure, the
adoption of SFAS No. 161 did not have a material
impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In February 2008, the FASB issued FSP
No. 157-1,
Application of FASB Statement 157 to FASB Statement 13
and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address Fair Value
Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement
under Statement 13 (FSP
No. 157-1),
and FSP
No. 157-2,
Effective Date of FASB Statement 157
(FSP
No. 157-2).
FSP
No. 157-1
amends SFAS No. 157 to remove certain leasing
transactions from its scope. FSP
No. 157-2
delays the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for all
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for
items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the
financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually),
until the beginning of our first quarter of fiscal year 2010. We
are currently
79
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
evaluating the impact that the application of SFAS 157 to
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities may have on our
consolidated financial statements. Our significant nonfinancial
assets and nonfinancial liabilities that may be impacted by the
adoption of FAS 157 include goodwill, intangible assets,
long-lived assets and restructuring liabilities.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141(R)).
SFAS No. 141(R) establishes principles and
requirements for how the acquirer in a business combination
recognizes and measures in its financial statements the
identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed and any
noncontrolling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition date
fair value. SFAS No. 141(R) determines what
information to disclose to enable users of the financial
statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the
business combination. We are required to adopt
SFAS No. 141(R) at the beginning of the first quarter
of fiscal 2010, which begins on April 25, 2009. The
adoption of SFAS No. 141(R) will change our accounting
treatment for business combinations on a prospective basis
beginning April 25, 2009. The impact that SFAS 141R
has on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations and cash flows will be dependent on the number and
size of business combinations that we consummate subsequent to
the adoption of the standard, as well as the valuation and
allocation of the net assets acquired.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements, an Amendment of ARB No. 51
(SFAS No. 160). SFAS No. 160
will change the accounting and reporting for minority interests,
which will be recharacterized as noncontrolling interests and
classified as a component of equity. This new consolidation
method will significantly change the accounting for transactions
with minority interest holders. We are required to adopt
SFAS No. 160 at the beginning of our first quarter of
fiscal 2010, which begins on April 25, 2009. We do not
expect the adoption of SFAS No. 160 to have a material
impact on our financial position or result of operations.
|
|
3.
|
Balance
Sheet Components
|
Short-Term
and Long-Term Investments
The following is a summary of investments at April 24, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
486,151
|
|
|
$
|
2,318
|
|
|
$
|
(1,802
|
)
|
|
$
|
486,667
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
73,278
|
|
|
|
296
|
|
|
|
(7,037
|
)
|
|
|
66,537
|
|
U.S. government agency bonds
|
|
|
80,359
|
|
|
|
1,415
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,774
|
|
U.S. Treasuries
|
|
|
31,862
|
|
|
|
773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,635
|
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
486,546
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
486,083
|
|
Certificates of deposit
|
|
|
115,002
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,085
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
1,327,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,327,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt and equity securities
|
|
|
2,600,992
|
|
|
|
4,886
|
|
|
|
(9,303
|
)
|
|
|
2,596,575
|
|
Less cash equivalents
|
|
|
1,368,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,368,355
|
|
Less long-term investments
|
|
|
124,908
|
|
|
|
296
|
|
|
|
(7,037
|
)
|
|
|
118,167
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total short-term investments
|
|
$
|
1,107,729
|
|
|
$
|
4,590
|
|
|
$
|
(2,266
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,110,053
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following is a summary of investments at April 25, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
382,528
|
|
|
$
|
2,066
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
$
|
383,691
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
76,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,500
|
)
|
|
|
72,702
|
|
U.S. government agency bonds
|
|
|
61,578
|
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
61,780
|
|
U.S. Treasuries
|
|
|
15,375
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,482
|
|
Municipal bonds
|
|
|
1,591
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,600
|
|
Certificates of deposit
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
839,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
839,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt and equity securities
|
|
|
1,377,117
|
|
|
|
2,534
|
|
|
|
(4,553
|
)
|
|
|
1,375,098
|
|
Less cash equivalents
|
|
|
831,872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
831,872
|
|
Less long-term restricted investments
|
|
|
241,867
|
|
|
|
1,033
|
|
|
|
(287
|
)
|
|
|
242,613
|
(2)
|
Less long-term unrestricted investments
|
|
|
76,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,500
|
)
|
|
|
72,702
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total short-term investments
|
|
$
|
227,176
|
|
|
$
|
1,501
|
|
|
$
|
(766
|
)
|
|
$
|
227,911
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The auction rate securities and the Reserve Primary Fund are
included in long-term investments and restricted cash in the
accompanying balance sheets as of April 24, 2009, along
with long term restricted cash of $5,181 relating to our foreign
rent, customs, and service performance guarantees, as well as
investments in nonpublic companies of $3,969. |
|
(2) |
|
As of April 25, 2008, we had pledged $242,613 of long-term
restricted investments as collateral for the revolving credit
facility (see Note 4). In addition, we had long-term
restricted cash of $4,621 relating to our foreign rent, custom,
and service performance guarantees, long-term available-for-sale
investment of $72,702 and investments in nonpublic companies of
$11,169. These combined amounts are presented as long-term
investments and restricted cash in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets as of April 25, 2008. |
On August 13, 2007, we sold 360 shares of common stock
of Blue Coat Systems, Inc. (Blue Coat) and received
net proceeds of $18,256 and recorded a $13,619 realized gain.
These shares of common stock in Blue Coat were received in
connection with the sale of certain assets of NetCache(R) to
Blue Coat on September 11, 2006, as described in
Note 11.
We record net unrealized gains or losses on available-for-sale
securities which are determined to be temporary in other
comprehensive income (loss). The following table shows the gross
unrealized losses and fair values of our investments, aggregated
by investment category and length of time that individual
securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position,
at April 24, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than 12 Months
|
|
|
12 Months or Greater
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
139,534
|
|
|
$
|
(1,233
|
)
|
|
$
|
58,346
|
|
|
$
|
(569
|
)
|
|
$
|
197,880
|
|
|
$
|
(1,802
|
)
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,638
|
|
|
|
(7,037
|
)
|
|
|
57,638
|
|
|
|
(7,037
|
)
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
400,306
|
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400,306
|
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
539,840
|
|
|
$
|
(1,697
|
)
|
|
$
|
115,984
|
|
|
$
|
(7,606
|
)
|
|
$
|
655,824
|
|
|
$
|
(9,303
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table shows the gross unrealized losses and fair
values of our investments, aggregated by investment category and
length of time that individual securities have been in a
continuous unrealized loss position, at April 25, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than 12 Months
|
|
|
12 Months or Greater
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
31,716
|
|
|
$
|
(175
|
)
|
|
$
|
99,011
|
|
|
$
|
(728
|
)
|
|
$
|
130,727
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
72,702
|
|
|
|
(3,500
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
72,702
|
|
|
$
|
(3,500
|
)
|
U.S. government agencies
|
|
|
4,024
|
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
8,163
|
|
|
|
(128
|
)
|
|
|
12,187
|
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
108,442
|
|
|
$
|
(3,697
|
)
|
|
$
|
107,174
|
|
|
$
|
(856
|
)
|
|
$
|
215,616
|
|
|
$
|
(4,553
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The unrealized losses on our investments in corporate bonds,
U.S. government agency bonds and corporate securities were
caused by market value declines as a result of the recent
economic environment, as well as fluctuations in market interest
rates. We believe that we will be able to collect all principal
and interest amounts due to us at maturity given the high credit
quality of these investments. Because the decline in market
value is attributable to changes in market conditions and not
credit quality, and because we have the ability and intent to
hold those investments until a recovery of par value, we do not
consider these investments to be other-than temporarily impaired
at April 24, 2009.
Our investments include direct and indirect investments in
Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc.
(Lehman Brothers) securities. As of
April 24, 2009, our short-term investments include
corporate bonds issued by Lehman Brothers, while our long-term
investments include the Reserve Primary Fund (Primary
Fund), which held Lehman Brothers investments. As a result
of the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers, we recorded an
other-than-temporary impairment charge of $21,129 in fiscal 2009
related to Lehman Brothers corporate bonds and the Primary Fund
that held Lehman Brothers investments.
Our long-term investments also include auction rate securities
(ARS) with a fair value of $66,537 and $72,702 at
April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, respectively.
Substantially all of our ARS are backed by pools of student
loans guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education. These
ARS are securities with long-term nominal maturities which, in
accordance with our investment policy guidelines, had credit
ratings of AAA and Aaa at the time of purchase. During the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, we reclassified all of our
investments in auction rate securities from short-term
investments to long-term investments as our ability to liquidate
these investments in the next twelve months is uncertain. Based
on an analysis of the fair value and marketability of these
investments, we recorded temporary impairment charges of
approximately $7,037 as of April 24, 2009, partially offset
by $296 in unrealized gains within other comprehensive income
(loss). During fiscal 2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary
impairment loss of $2,122 due to a significant decline in the
estimated fair values of certain of our ARS related to credit
quality risk and rating downgrades.
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Purchased components
|
|
$
|
5,034
|
|
|
$
|
7,665
|
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
271
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
56,014
|
|
|
|
62,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
61,104
|
|
|
$
|
70,222
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Property
and Equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Depreciation Life (Years)
|
|
|
Land
|
|
$
|
176,131
|
|
|
$
|
176,129
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings and building improvements
|
|
|
323,251
|
|
|
|
229,067
|
|
|
|
10 - 40
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
70,207
|
|
|
|
67,860
|
|
|
|
3 - 10
|
|
Computers, related equipment and purchased software
|
|
|
562,330
|
|
|
|
480,770
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Furniture
|
|
|
61,692
|
|
|
|
52,540
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Construction-in-progress
|
|
|
114,788
|
|
|
|
90,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,308,399
|
|
|
|
1,096,835
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(500,476
|
)
|
|
|
(403,043
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
807,923
|
|
|
$
|
693,792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
|
Convertible
Notes and Credit Facilities
|
1.75% Convertible
Senior Notes Due 2013
Principal Amount On June 10, 2008, we
issued $1,265,000 aggregate principal amount of
1.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2013 (the
Notes) to initial purchasers who resold the Notes to
qualified institutional buyers as defined in Rule 144A
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The net proceeds
from the offering, after deducting the initial purchasers
issue costs and offering expenses of $26,581, were $1,238,419.
Ranking and Interest The Notes are unsecured,
unsubordinated obligations of NetApp. Interest is payable in
cash at a rate of 1.75% per annum. We capitalized issuance costs
related to the Notes of $26,581, which are included in long-term
other assets and are being amortized as interest expense over
the term of the Notes using the effective interest method.
Maturity The Notes will mature on
June 1, 2013 unless repurchased or converted earlier in
accordance with their terms prior to such date.
Redemption The Notes are not redeemable by us
prior to the maturity date, but the holders may require us to
repurchase the Notes following a fundamental change
(as defined in the Indenture). A fundamental change will be
deemed to have occurred upon a change of control, liquidation or
a termination of trading. Holders of the Notes who convert their
Notes in connection with a fundamental change will, under
certain circumstances, be entitled to a make-whole premium in
the form of an increase in the conversion rate. Additionally, in
the event of a fundamental change, holders of the Notes may
require us to repurchase all or a portion of their Notes at a
repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to, but not
including, the fundamental change repurchase date.
Conversion Holders of the Notes may convert
their Notes on or after March 1, 2013 until the close of
business on the scheduled trading day immediately preceding the
maturity date. Upon conversion, we will satisfy our conversion
obligation by delivering cash and shares of our common stock, if
any, based on a daily settlement amount. Prior to March 1,
2013, holders of the Notes may convert their Notes, under any of
the following conditions:
|
|
|
|
|
during the five business day period after any five consecutive
trading day period in which the trading price of the Notes for
each day in this five consecutive trading day period was less
than 98% of an amount equal to (i) the last reported sale
price of Common Stock multiplied by (ii) the conversion
rate on such day;
|
83
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
during any calendar quarter beginning after June 30, 2008
(and only during such calendar quarter), if the last reported
sale price of Common Stock for 20 or more trading days in a
period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading
day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter exceeds 130%
of the applicable conversion price in effect for the Notes on
the last trading day of such immediately preceding calendar
quarter; or
|
|
|
|
upon the occurrence of specified corporate transactions under
the indenture for the Notes.
|
The Notes are convertible into the right to receive cash in an
amount up to the principal amount and shares of our common stock
for the conversion value in excess of the principal amount, if
any, at an initial conversion rate of 31.4006 shares of
common stock per one thousand principal amount of Notes, subject
to adjustment as described in the indenture governing the Notes,
which represents an initial conversion price of $31.85 per share.
Note
Hedges and Warrants
Concurrent with the issuance of the Notes, we entered into note
hedge transactions (the Note Hedges), which are
designed to mitigate potential dilution from the conversion of
the Notes in the event that the market value per share of our
common stock at the time of exercise is greater than $31.85 per
share, subject to adjustments. The Note Hedges generally cover,
subject to anti-dilution adjustments, the net shares of our
common stock that would be deliverable to converting Noteholders
in the event of a conversion of the Notes. The Note Hedges
expire at the earlier of (i) the last day on which any
Notes remain outstanding and (ii) the scheduled trading day
immediately preceding the maturity date of the Notes. We also
entered into separate warrant transactions whereby we sold to
the same financial institutions warrants (the
Warrants) to acquire, subject to anti-dilution
adjustments, 39,700 shares of our common stock at an
exercise price of $41.28 per share, subject to adjustment, on a
series of days commencing on September 3, 2013. Upon
exercise of the Warrants, we have the option to deliver cash or
shares of our common stock equal to the difference between the
then market price and the strike price of the Warrants. As of
April 24, 2009, we had not received any shares related to
the Note Hedges or delivered cash or shares related to the
Warrants.
If the market value per share of our common stock at the time of
conversion of the Notes is above the strike price of the Note
Hedges, the Note Hedges will generally entitle us to receive net
shares of our common stock (and cash for any fractional share
amount) based on the excess of the then current market price of
our common stock over the strike price of the Note Hedges, which
is designed to offset any shares that we may have to deliver to
the Noteholders. Additionally, at the time of exercise of the
Warrants, if the market price of our common stock exceeds the
strike price of the Warrants, we will owe the option
counterparties net shares of our common stock (and cash for any
fractional share amount) or cash in an amount based on the
excess of the then current market price of our common stock over
the strike price of the Warrants.
The cost of the Note Hedges was $254,898, or $152,200 net
of deferred tax benefits, and has been accounted for as an
equity transaction in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF)
No. 00-19,
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed
to, and Potentially Settled in, a Companys Own Stock
(EITF No. 00- 19).
We received proceeds of $163,059 related to the sale of the
Warrants, which has also been classified as equity because the
instruments meet all of the equity classification criteria
within EITF
No. 00-19.
Lehman Brothers OTC Derivatives, Inc. (Lehman OTC)
is the counterparty to 20% of our Note Hedges. The bankruptcy
filing by Lehman OTC on October 3, 2008 constituted an
event of default under the hedge transaction that
could, at our option, lead to termination under the hedge
transaction to the extent we provide notice to the counterparty
under such transaction. We have not terminated the Note Hedge
transaction with Lehman OTC, and will continue to carefully
monitor the developments impacting Lehman OTC. The event
of default is not expected to have an impact on our
financial position or results of operations. However, we could
incur significant costs to replace this hedge transaction
originally held with Lehman OTC if we elect to do so. If we do
not elect to replace this hedge transaction, then we would be
subject to potential dilution upon conversion of the Notes, if
on the date of conversion the per-share market price of our
common stock exceeds the conversion price of $31.85.
84
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The terms of the Notes, the rights of the holders of the Notes
and other counterparties to Note Hedges and Warrants were not
affected by the bankruptcy filings of Lehman OTC.
Earnings per share impact on the Notes, Note Hedges and
Warrants In accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 128,
the Notes will have no impact on diluted earnings per share
unless the price of our common stock exceeds the conversion
price (initially $31.85 per share) because the principal amount
of the Notes will be settled in cash upon conversion. The Note
Hedges are not included for purposes of calculating earnings per
share for fiscal 2009, as their effect would be anti-dilutive.
Upon conversion of the Notes, the Note Hedges are designed to
neutralize the dilutive effect of the Notes when the stock price
is above $31.85 per share. Also, in accordance with
SFAS No. 128, the Warrants will have no impact on
earnings per share until our common stock share price exceeds
$41.28. Prior to conversion of the Notes or exercise of the Note
Hedges, we will include the effect of additional shares that may
be issued if our common stock price exceeds the conversion
price, using the treasury stock method.
Unsecured
Credit Agreement
On November 2, 2007, we entered into a senior unsecured
credit agreement (the Unsecured Credit Agreement)
with certain lenders and BNP Paribas (BNP), as
syndication agent, and JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association
(JPMorgan), as administrative agent. The Unsecured
Credit Agreement provides for a revolving unsecured credit
facility that is comprised of commitments from various lenders
who agree to make revolving loans and swingline loans and issue
letters of credit of up to an aggregate amount of $250,000 with
a term of five years. Revolving loans may be, at our option,
Alternative Base Rate borrowings or Eurodollar borrowings.
Interest on Eurodollar borrowings accrues at a floating rate
based on LIBOR for the interest period specified by us plus a
spread based on our leverage ratio. Interest on Alternative Base
Rate borrowings, swingline loans, and letters of credit accrues
at a rate based on the Prime Rate in effect on such day. The
proceeds of the loans may be used for our general corporate
purposes, including stock repurchases and working capital needs.
As of April 24, 2009, no amount was outstanding under this
facility. The amounts allocated under the Unsecured Credit
Agreement to support certain of our outstanding letters of
credit amounted to $638 as of April 24, 2009. As of
April 24, 2009, we were in compliance with all covenants as
required by the Unsecured Credit Agreement.
Secured
Credit Agreement
On October 5, 2007, we entered into a secured credit
agreement (the Secured Credit Agreement). The
Secured Credit Agreement provided for a revolving secured credit
facility of up to $250,000 with a term of five years. As of
April 25, 2008, the outstanding balance on the Secured
Credit Agreement was $172,600, which was recorded as Revolving
Credit Facilities in the consolidated balance sheets, and was
secured with $242,613 of long-term restricted investments
pledged in connection with this agreement. During fiscal 2009,
we terminated the Secured Credit Agreement. No borrowings were
outstanding at the time of termination and no penalties resulted
from the early termination.
Loan
Agreement
On March 31, 2006, NetApp Global LTD. (Global),
a subsidiary of the Company, entered into a loan agreement (the
Loan Agreement). The Loan Agreement provided for an
aggregate borrowings of $300,000. The Loan Agreement was fully
repaid as of April 25, 2008.
Foreign
Exchange Facilities
We also have foreign exchange facilities used for hedging
arrangements with several banks that allow us to enter into
foreign exchange contracts of up to $600,000, of which $317,210
was available at April 24, 2009.
85
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
5.
|
Stock-Based
Compensation, Equity Incentive Programs and Stockholders
Equity
|
Stock-based compensation expenses included in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Cost of product revenues
|
|
$
|
3,327
|
|
|
$
|
3,384
|
|
|
$
|
3,720
|
|
Cost of service revenues
|
|
|
12,289
|
|
|
|
10,442
|
|
|
|
10,088
|
|
Sales and marketing
|
|
|
65,085
|
|
|
|
65,399
|
|
|
|
71,701
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
37,902
|
|
|
|
46,632
|
|
|
|
51,323
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
22,151
|
|
|
|
22,107
|
|
|
|
26,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stock-based compensation expense before income taxes
|
|
$
|
140,754
|
|
|
$
|
147,964
|
|
|
$
|
163,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes stock-based compensation
associated with each type of award:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Employee stock options and restricted stock units
|
|
$
|
113,350
|
|
|
$
|
131,410
|
|
|
$
|
150,257
|
|
ESPP
|
|
|
27,411
|
|
|
|
16,513
|
|
|
|
13,099
|
|
Change in amounts capitalized in inventory
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
(323
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stock-based compensation expense before income taxes
|
|
$
|
140,754
|
|
|
$
|
147,964
|
|
|
$
|
163,033
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation
Assumptions
We estimated the fair value of stock options using the
Black-Scholes model on the date of the grant. Assumptions used
in the Black-Scholes valuation model were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Options
|
|
ESPP
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
April 25,
|
|
April 27,
|
|
April 24,
|
|
April 25,
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Expected term in years(1)
|
|
4.0
|
|
4.0
|
|
4.0
|
|
1.3
|
|
1.3
|
|
1.3
|
Risk-free interest rate(2)
|
|
1.08% - 3.69%
|
|
2.04% - 5.02%
|
|
4.42% - 5.05%
|
|
0.92% -2.52%
|
|
2.36% - 4.95%
|
|
4.42% - 5.06%
|
Volatility(3)
|
|
38% - 69%
|
|
33% - 55%
|
|
32% - 38%
|
|
39% - 76%
|
|
35% - 49%
|
|
32% - 38%
|
Expected dividend(4)
|
|
0%
|
|
0%
|
|
0%
|
|
0%
|
|
0%
|
|
0%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The 4.0 years expected term of the options represent the
estimated period of time until exercise and is based on
historical experience with similar awards, giving consideration
to the contractual terms, vesting schedules, and expectations of
future employee behavior. The expected life for the ESPP rights
was based on the term of the purchase period. |
|
(2) |
|
The risk-free interest rate for the stock option awards was
based upon United States (U.S.) Treasury bills with
equivalent expected terms. The risk-free interest rate for the
employee stock purchase plan was based on the U.S. Treasury
bills in effect at the time of grant for the expected term of
the purchase period. |
|
(3) |
|
We used the implied volatility of traded options to estimate our
stock price volatility. |
|
(4) |
|
The expected dividend was determined based on our history and
expected dividend payouts. |
86
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We estimate our forfeiture rates based on historical termination
behavior and recognize compensation expense only for those
equity awards expected to vest.
Equity
Incentive Programs
Stock Incentive Plans
The 1995 Plan The 1995 Stock Incentive Plan
(the 1995 Plan) expired on August 31, 2008, and
no further grants may be made from the plan.
Options granted under the 1995 Plan generally vested at a rate
of 25% on the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date
and then ratably over the following 36 months. Options
expired as determined by the Board of Directors, but not more
than 10 years after the date of grant. The 1999 Plan
supplements the 1995 Plan.
The Nonofficer Plan In April 1997, the Board
of Directors adopted the Special Nonofficer Stock Option Plan
(the Nonofficer Plan) which provides for the grant
of options and the issuance of common stock under terms
substantially the same as those provided under the 1995 Plan,
except that the Nonofficer Plan allows only for the issuance of
nonqualified options to nonofficer employees. The Nonofficer
Plan expired on December 31, 2007, and no further grants
may be made from the plan.
The 1999 Plan As amended through
April 24, 2009, the 1999 Stock Option Plan (the 1999
Plan) comprises five separate equity incentive programs:
(i) the Discretionary Option Grant Program under which
options may be granted to eligible individuals during the
service period at a fixed price per share; (ii) the Stock
Appreciation Rights Program under which eligible persons may be
granted stock appreciation rights that allow individuals to
receive the appreciation in Fair Market Value of the shares;
(iii) the Stock Issuance Program under which eligible
individuals may be issued shares of Common Stock directly;
(iv) the Performance Share and Performance Unit Program
(also known as restricted stock units or RSUs) under which
eligible persons may be granted performance shares and
performance units which result in payment to the participant
only if performance goals or other vesting criteria are
achieved; and (v) the Automatic Option Grant Program under
which nonemployee board members automatically receive option
grants at designated intervals over their period of board
service.
Under the 1999 Plan, the Board of Directors may grant to
employees, nonemployee directors, and consultants and other
independent advisors options to purchase shares of our common
stock during their period of service with us. The exercise price
for an incentive stock option and a nonstatutory option cannot
be less than 100% of the fair market value of the common stock
on the grant date. Options granted under the 1999 Plan generally
vest over a four-year period. Options granted prior to
April 29, 2006, have a term of no more than 10 years
after the date of grant and those granted after April 29,
2006 have a term of no more than seven years, subject to earlier
termination upon the occurrence of certain events. The 1999 Plan
prohibits the repricing of any outstanding stock option or stock
appreciation right after it has been granted or to cancel any
outstanding stock option or stock appreciation right and
immediately replace it with a new stock option or stock
appreciation right with a lower exercise price unless approved
by stockholders. Restricted stock units granted under the 1999
Plan generally vest over a four-year period with 25% of the
units vesting on each annual anniversary of the grant date. The
1999 Plan limits the percentage of Stock Issuance and
Performance Shares or Performance Units that may be granted
under the Plan to 30% of the shares reserved; limits the value
of performance units a participant may receive during any
calendar year to $2,000. The 1999 Plan expires on August 2019.
Acquisition Plans In fiscal 2008, we assumed
a stock incentive plan in connection with our acquisition of
Onaro (see Note 11). Under the terms of the merger
agreement, options and restricted stock units to purchase
1,000 shares were exchanged at certain exchange ratios. The
options granted under this plan generally vest at a rate of 25%
on the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date and
then ratably over the following 36 months. The restricted
stock units generally vest at a rate of 50% on the first and
second annual anniversaries of the vesting commencement date.
87
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In fiscal 2007, we assumed two stock incentive plans in
connection with our acquisition of Topio (see Note 11.)
Under the terms of the merger agreement, options and restricted
stock units to purchase 858 shares were exchanged at
certain exchange ratios. The options granted under these plans
generally vest at a rate of 25% on the first anniversary of the
vesting commencement date and then ratably over the following
36 months. The restricted stock units generally vest at a
rate of 50% on the first and second annual anniversaries of the
vesting commencement date.
In fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, 1999 Plan was amended to increase
the share reserved by an additional 6,600, 7,200, and
10,900 shares for issuance under the plan, respectively. As
of April 24, 2009, 17,822 shares were available for
grant under our equity incentive plans.
A summary of the combined activity under our stock option plans
and agreements is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Numbers
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Balances, April 28, 2006
|
|
|
64,861
|
|
|
$
|
26.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
12,820
|
|
|
|
36.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed Topio options issued (weighted average fair value of
$39.33)
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
20.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(11,908
|
)
|
|
|
14.97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeitures and canceled
|
|
|
(3,039
|
)
|
|
|
38.36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 27, 2007
|
|
|
63,592
|
|
|
$
|
29.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
11,196
|
|
|
|
26.41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed Onaro options issued (weighted average fair value of
$22.22)
|
|
|
808
|
|
|
|
13.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(5,343
|
)
|
|
|
12.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeitures and cancellation
|
|
|
(4,639
|
)
|
|
|
37.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
65,614
|
|
|
$
|
30.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
8,685
|
|
|
|
17.67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(3,666
|
)
|
|
|
11.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeitures and cancellations
|
|
|
(4,514
|
)
|
|
|
32.61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 24, 2009
|
|
|
66,119
|
|
|
$
|
29.27
|
|
|
|
4.43
|
|
|
$
|
64,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options vested and expected to vest as of April 24, 2009
|
|
|
63,547
|
|
|
$
|
29.49
|
|
|
|
4.37
|
|
|
$
|
60,584
|
|
Exercisable at April 24, 2009
|
|
|
47,476
|
|
|
$
|
31.01
|
|
|
|
3.88
|
|
|
$
|
39,187
|
|
The intrinsic value of stock options represents the difference
between the exercise price of stock options and the market price
of our stock on that day for all in-the-money options. The
weighted-average fair value of options granted during fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 was $7.28, $10.13 and $12.83, respectively.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during fiscal
2009, 2008 and 2007 was $30,325, $83,129 and $267,165,
respectively. We received $41,083, $66,614, and $178,241 from
the exercise of stock options for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. Total fair value of options vested during fiscal
2009 was $179,805.
88
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes information about stock options
outstanding under all option plans as of April 24, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Range of
|
|
|
Outstanding at
|
|
|
Contractual Life
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Exercise Prices
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
(In years)
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
$ 0.55
|
|
$
|
5.000
|
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
4.77
|
|
|
$
|
1.93
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
$
|
1.88
|
|
6.26
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
|
|
3.41
|
|
|
|
9.73
|
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
|
|
9.73
|
|
10.24
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
5,976
|
|
|
|
5.91
|
|
|
|
13.21
|
|
|
|
1,330
|
|
|
|
12.43
|
|
15.21
|
|
|
20.00
|
|
|
|
6,169
|
|
|
|
3.33
|
|
|
|
17.18
|
|
|
|
6,012
|
|
|
|
17.20
|
|
20.16
|
|
|
25.00
|
|
|
|
17,621
|
|
|
|
4.63
|
|
|
|
22.32
|
|
|
|
11,707
|
|
|
|
22.06
|
|
25.08
|
|
|
30.00
|
|
|
|
7,123
|
|
|
|
5.69
|
|
|
|
28.02
|
|
|
|
5,195
|
|
|
|
28.32
|
|
30.74
|
|
|
35.00
|
|
|
|
12,314
|
|
|
|
4.89
|
|
|
|
32.11
|
|
|
|
9,463
|
|
|
|
32.20
|
|
35.83
|
|
|
45.00
|
|
|
|
8,580
|
|
|
|
4.68
|
|
|
|
38.98
|
|
|
|
5,478
|
|
|
|
39.06
|
|
46.56
|
|
|
55.00
|
|
|
|
3,727
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
53.52
|
|
|
|
3,727
|
|
|
|
53.52
|
|
58.00
|
|
|
122.19
|
|
|
|
2,318
|
|
|
|
1.09
|
|
|
|
89.70
|
|
|
|
2,318
|
|
|
|
89.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
$
|
122.19
|
|
|
|
66,119
|
|
|
|
4.43
|
|
|
$
|
29.27
|
|
|
|
47,476
|
|
|
$
|
31.01
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes activity related to our
restricted stock units:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Numbers of
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Balances, April 28, 2006
|
|
|
848
|
|
|
$
|
33.71
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted
|
|
|
753
|
|
|
|
37.58
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units vested
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
24.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units forfeitures and canceled
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
36.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 27, 2007
|
|
|
1,451
|
|
|
$
|
36.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted
|
|
|
3,373
|
|
|
|
23.11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed Onaro restricted stock units issued
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
22.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units vested
|
|
|
(309
|
)
|
|
|
33.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units forfeitures and cancellation
|
|
|
(153
|
)
|
|
|
33.65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
4,554
|
|
|
$
|
26.30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units granted
|
|
|
2,173
|
|
|
|
17.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units vested
|
|
|
(770
|
)
|
|
|
28.81
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock units forfeitures and cancellations
|
|
|
(504
|
)
|
|
|
25.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at April 24, 2009
|
|
|
5,453
|
|
|
$
|
22.38
|
|
|
|
1.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There was $256,745 of total unrecognized compensation expense as
of April 24, 2009 related to options and restricted stock
units. The unrecognized compensation expense will be amortized
on a straight-line basis over a weighted-average remaining
period of 2.5 years. For fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, total
income tax benefit associated with employee stock transactions
and recognized in the statement of stockholders equity was
$43,855, $48,195 and $175,036, respectively.
89
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock Option Exchange Program On
April 21, 2009, our stockholders approved a stock option
exchange program pursuant to which eligible employees would be
able to exchange some or all of their outstanding options with
an exercise price greater or equal to $22.00 per share that were
granted before June 20, 2008, whether vested or unvested,
for new RSUs. The number of RSUs that will be granted in
exchange for the options will depend on the exercise price of
the options exchanged. The vesting schedule of the RSUs will be
determined on a
grant-by-grant
basis and will depend on the extent to which the options
surrendered in exchange for such RSUs have vested at the time of
such exchange and, for surrendered options that are fully
vested, the exercise price. Vesting of the RSUs will be
conditioned upon continued service with us through each
applicable vesting date. On May 22, 2009, we commenced the
option exchange program, which unless extended by us, will
expire on June 19, 2009. For more information, please see
our tender offer statement on Schedule TO, as filed with
the SEC on May 22, 2009, as may be amended from time to
time.
Stock Issuance Program Under the 1999 Stock
Issuance Program, certain eligible persons may be issued shares
of common stock directly. No restricted stock award was issued
to employees during fiscal 2009 and 2008. During fiscal 2007,
125 shares of restricted stock awards were issued to
certain employees. At April 24, 2009, 5,446 shares
were available for future issuances under this program.
The following table summarizes activity related to our
restricted stock awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Grant-Date Fair Value
|
|
|
Nonvested at April 28, 2006
|
|
|
228
|
|
|
$
|
27.58
|
|
Awards granted
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
39.83
|
|
Awards vested
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
24.00
|
|
Awards canceled/expired/forfeited
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
29.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at April 27, 2007
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
$
|
34.45
|
|
Awards vested
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
32.62
|
|
Awards canceled/expired/forfeited
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
34.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
$
|
35.40
|
|
Awards vested
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
|
|
34.07
|
|
Awards canceled/expired/forfeited
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
30.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested at April 24, 2009
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
$
|
36.68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although nonvested shares are legally issued, they are
considered contingently returnable shares subject to repurchase
by the Company when employees terminate their employment. The
total fair value of shares vested during fiscal 2009, 2008 and
2007 was $1,987, $1,632, and $3,135, respectively. There was
$2,530 of total unrecognized compensation expense as of
April 24, 2009 related to restricted stock awards. The
unrecognized compensation expense will be amortized on a
straight-line basis over a weighted-average remaining period of
1.3 years.
Employee Stock Purchase Plan Under the ESPP,
employees are entitled to purchase shares of our common stock at
85% of the fair market value at certain specified dates over a
two-year period. In fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, the plan was
amended to increase the share reserved by an additional 2,900,
1,600 and 1,600 shares of common stock, respectively. The
weighted average fair value of purchase rights granted under the
ESPP during fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $6.17, $7.44, and
$7.94, respectively. During fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, 3,333,
2,057, and 1,632 shares, respectively, were issued under
the ESPP at a weighted average price of $14.96, $23.38, and
$22.78 respectively. Of the 23,500 shares authorized to be
issued under this plan, 3,376 shares were available for
issuance at April 24, 2009.
90
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stockholders
Equity
Preferred Stock Our Board of Directors has
the authority to issue up to 5,000 shares of preferred
stock and to determine the price, rights, preferences,
privileges, and restrictions, including voting rights, of those
shares without any further vote or action by the stockholders.
Stock Repurchase Program Since the inception
of the stock repurchase program on May 13, 2003 through
April 24, 2009, we have purchased a total of
104,325 shares of our common stock at an average price of
$28.06 per share for an aggregate purchase price of $2,927,376.
As of April 24, 2009, our Board of Directors had authorized
the repurchase of up to $4,023,639 of common stock under the
various stock repurchase programs, and $1,096,262 remains
available under these authorizations. The stock repurchase
program may be suspended or discontinued at any time.
During fiscal 2009, we repurchased 16,960 shares of our
common stock at an aggregate cost of $399,981, or a weighted
average price of $23.58 per share. During fiscal 2008, we
repurchased 32,772 shares of our common stock at an
aggregate cost of $903,704, or a weighted average price of
$27.58 per share. The repurchases were recorded as treasury
stock and resulted in a reduction of stockholders equity.
Income before income taxes is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
(214,420
|
)
|
|
$
|
45,769
|
|
|
$
|
38,875
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
259,249
|
|
|
|
336,930
|
|
|
|
320,853
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
44,829
|
|
|
$
|
382,699
|
|
|
$
|
359,728
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision (benefit) for income taxes consists of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
15,588
|
|
|
$
|
48,791
|
|
|
$
|
154,590
|
|
State
|
|
|
39,888
|
|
|
|
23,849
|
|
|
|
23,153
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
11,179
|
|
|
|
17,708
|
|
|
|
11,553
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current
|
|
|
66,655
|
|
|
|
90,348
|
|
|
|
189,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(65,296
|
)
|
|
|
7,134
|
|
|
|
(107,166
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
(49,240
|
)
|
|
|
(20,458
|
)
|
|
|
(20,137
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
6,165
|
|
|
|
(4,063
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred
|
|
|
(108,371
|
)
|
|
|
(17,387
|
)
|
|
|
(127,303
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
$
|
(41,716
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,961
|
|
|
$
|
61,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The provision (benefit) for income taxes differs from the amount
computed by applying the statutory federal income tax rate as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Tax computed at federal statutory rate
|
|
$
|
15,690
|
|
|
$
|
133,945
|
|
|
$
|
125,904
|
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
(6,079
|
)
|
|
|
2,204
|
|
|
|
1,961
|
|
Federal credits
|
|
|
(9,183
|
)
|
|
|
(4,659
|
)
|
|
|
(7,757
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation pursuant to SFAS No. 123R
|
|
|
10,160
|
|
|
|
11,001
|
|
|
|
25,008
|
|
Foreign earnings in lower tax jurisdiction
|
|
|
(50,973
|
)
|
|
|
(67,596
|
)
|
|
|
(82,071
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(1,331
|
)
|
|
|
(1,934
|
)
|
|
|
(1,052
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes
|
|
$
|
(41,716
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,961
|
|
|
$
|
61,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The income tax benefits associated with dispositions from
employee stock transactions of $43,855, $48,195, and $175,036,
respectively, for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, were recognized as
additional paid-in capital.
The components of our deferred tax assets and liabilities are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Deferred Tax Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory reserves and capitalization
|
|
$
|
4,902
|
|
|
$
|
22,801
|
|
Reserves and accruals not currently deductible
|
|
|
197,715
|
|
|
|
20,169
|
|
Net operating loss and credit carryforwards
|
|
|
63,612
|
|
|
|
71,656
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
77,830
|
|
|
|
61,062
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
154,343
|
|
|
|
116,621
|
|
Capitalized research and development expenditures
|
|
|
6,693
|
|
|
|
2,394
|
|
Investment losses
|
|
|
2,306
|
|
|
|
2,088
|
|
Conditional royalty
|
|
|
13,529
|
|
|
|
15,969
|
|
Other
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross deferred tax assets
|
|
|
521,084
|
|
|
|
312,856
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(28,048
|
)
|
|
|
(28,576
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
493,036
|
|
|
|
284,280
|
|
Deferred Tax Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
7,134
|
|
|
|
(624
|
)
|
Acquisition intangibles
|
|
|
(15,052
|
)
|
|
|
(23,178
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(15,709
|
)
|
|
|
(453
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(23,627
|
)
|
|
|
(24,255
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
469,409
|
|
|
$
|
260,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current net deferred tax assets are $207,050 and $127,197 as of
fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively. Noncurrent net deferred tax
assets for fiscal 2009 and 2008 are $262,359 and $132,828,
respectively, and are included in Long Term Deferred Taxes and
Other Assets within the accompanying consolidated balance
sheets. The valuation allowance decreased by $528 in fiscal 2009
primarily due to a change in the blended state tax rates.
92
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
As discussed in Note 2, effective April 28, 2007, we
adopted FIN No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes an interpretation of
FASB Statement No. 109,, which clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an
enterprises financial statements in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. This interpretation prescribes a recognition
threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement
recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected
to be taken in a tax return. FIN No. 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition of tax benefits, classification on the
balance sheet, interest and penalties, accounting in interim
periods, disclosure, and transition.
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of
unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of fiscal year
|
|
$
|
97,765
|
|
|
$
|
58,326
|
|
Additions based on tax positions related to the current year
|
|
|
13,831
|
|
|
|
21,184
|
|
Additions for tax positions of prior years
|
|
|
686
|
|
|
|
18,255
|
|
Decreases in tax positions of prior years
|
|
|
(2,190
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of fiscal year (included in Other Long-term
Obligations)
|
|
$
|
110,092
|
|
|
$
|
97,765
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Out of the entire balance of unrecognized tax benefits at
April 24, 2009, $93,136 , if recognized, would affect our
provision for income taxes.
We recognize accrued interest and penalties related to
unrecognized tax benefits in the income tax provision. During
the fiscal years ended 2005 through 2009, we recognized total
accrued interest and penalties of approximately $170 and have
included this accrual in our liability for unrecognized tax
benefits.
We are subject to taxation in the United States, various states,
and several foreign jurisdictions.
The tax years that remain subject to examination for our major
tax jurisdictions are shown below:
Tax
Years Subject to Examination for Major Tax Jurisdictions at
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
2003 2008
|
|
United States federal income tax
|
2003 2008
|
|
United States state and local income tax
|
2004 2008
|
|
Australia
|
2004 2008
|
|
Germany
|
2005 2008
|
|
India
|
2006 2008
|
|
Japan
|
2005 2008
|
|
The Netherlands
|
2004 2008
|
|
United Kingdom
|
In addition, we are effectively subject to federal tax
examination adjustments for tax years ended on or after fiscal
year 2000, in that we have net operating loss carryforwards from
these years that could be subject to adjustment, if and when
utilized.
We are currently undergoing federal income tax audits in the
United States for the fiscal years 2003 and 2004 and in several
foreign tax jurisdictions. The rights to some of our
intellectual property (IP) are owned by certain of
our foreign subsidiaries, and payments are made between foreign
and U.S. tax jurisdictions relating to the use of this IP
in a qualified cost sharing arrangement. Recently, several other
U.S. companies have had their foreign IP arrangements
challenged as part of IRS examinations, which have resulted in
material proposed assessments
and/or
pending litigation. During fiscal 2009, we received Notices of
Proposed Adjustments from the IRS in connection with the tax
audit of our fiscal year 2003 and 2004 tax returns. We recently
filed a protest with the IRS in response to
93
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the Notices of Proposed Adjustment. The Notices of Proposed
Adjustment focus primarily on issues of the timing and the
amount of income recognized and deductions taken during the
audit years and on the level of cost allocations made to foreign
operations during the audit years. At this time we cannot make a
determination as to the amount our unrecognized tax benefits
will be reduced as a result of the audit. We do not expect
resolution of our IRS audit or other audits within significant
foreign or state jurisdictions over the next 12 months.
As mentioned above, the rights to some of our IP are owned by
certain of our foreign subsidiaries, and payments are made
between foreign and U.S. tax jurisdictions relating to the
use of this IP and a qualified cost sharing arrangement.
Effective September 27, 2007, the IRSs Large and
Mid-Sized Business Division (LMSB) released a
Coordinated Issues Paper (CIP) with respect to
qualified cost sharing arrangements (CSAs).
Specifically, this CIP provides guidance to IRS personnel
concerning methods that may be applied to evaluate the
arms length charge (buy-in payment) for internally
developed (pre-existing) as well as acquisition-related
intangible property that is made available to a qualified CSA.
On March 20, 2008, the IRSs LMSB also released a CIP
with respect to the cost sharing of stock based compensation.
Specifically, this CIP provides guidance to IRS personnel
concerning stock based compensation related to a CSA by
providing that the parties to a CSA will share all costs related
to intangible development of the covered intangibles, including
but not limited to, salaries, bonuses, and other payroll costs
and benefits. Taxpayers should include all forms of compensation
in the cost pool, including those costs related to stock-based
compensation.
Additionally, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit on May 27, 2009 held in Xilinx Inc. v.
Commissioner that stock-based compensation must be included in
the research and development cost base of companies that have
entered into a cost sharing arrangement and must, therefore, be
allocated among the participants based on anticipated benefits.
The Courts reversal of the prior U.S. Tax Court
decision will change our estimate of tax benefits that were
required to be recognized in connection with our adoption of
FIN 48 at the beginning of fiscal year 2008. We are
currently evaluating the impact of the Xilinx case on our
provision for income taxes for the first quarter of fiscal 2010
but expect any final adjustment will be limited to a reduction
of our unrecognized tax attributes.
Pursuant to the requirements of Footnote 82 of
SFAS No. 123R, we do not include unrealized stock
option attributes as components of our gross deferred tax assets
and corresponding valuation allowance disclosures. Footnote 82
is applied on a prospective basis. The tax effected amounts of
gross unrealized net operating loss and business tax credit
carryforwards, and their corresponding valuation allowance
excluded under Footnote 82 for the years ended April 24,
2009 and April 25, 2008 are $278,890 and $245,130,
respectively, which will result in additional paid in capital if
and when realized as a reduction in taxes otherwise paid.
As of our fiscal years ended April 24, 2009 and
April 25, 2008, the amount of accumulated unremitted
earnings from our foreign subsidiaries under APB No. 23 is
approximately $873,100 and $677,200, respectively.
During fiscal 2006, our Netherlands subsidiary received a
favorable tax ruling from the Netherlands tax authorities
effective May 1, 2005. This ruling replaced a previous
Netherlands tax ruling that was scheduled to expire on
December 31, 2005. This ruling results in both a lower
level of earnings subject to tax in the Netherlands and an
extension of the expiration date to April 30, 2010.
Network Appliance Systems India Pvt. Ltd. received a tax holiday
from the Indian tax authorities attributed to its call center
and research and development activities effective June 6,
2003. These activities qualify under the Software Technology
Park of India (STPI) incentive for the development
and manufacture of computer software and information technology
enabled services. Under this tax holiday, net income derived
from call center and research and development activities is
exempt from Indian taxation. This tax holiday is set to expire
on March 31, 2010. Notwithstanding qualification for this
tax holiday, new general minimum tax rules in India effective
for us as of fiscal 2009 override the full tax exemption. For
fiscal 2009, we were subject to a minimum tax on this income in
India at a rate of 11.33%.
94
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of April 24, 2009, our Netherlands subsidiary had a
conditional royalty expense carryforward of $62,624 that may
become available for offset against future Netherlands income.
The carryforward may not, however, be used to offset income
under the new Netherlands tax ruling expiring April 30,
2010. The carryforward does not have an expiration date. We have
established a valuation allowance against the deferred tax asset
for the carryforward based upon our belief that we will not be
able to utilize this attribute. In the event we are able to
utilize this attribute, the tax benefit of the carryforward will
be accounted for as a credit to stockholders equity of
$9,219 and as a reduction to the income tax provision of $6,750.
As of April 24, 2009, the federal and state net operating
loss carryforwards for income tax purposes were approximately
$538,372 and $142,414, respectively. The federal net operating
loss carryforwards will begin to expire in fiscal 2020. State
net operating losses of $6,074 will expire in fiscal years 2010
through 2012; $10,640 will expire in fiscal year 2013 while the
remaining $125,700 will expire in fiscal years 2014 through 2029.
As of April 24, 2009, we had federal and state tax credit
carryforwards of approximately $81,635 and $81,220,
respectively, available to offset future income tax liabilities.
Federal tax credit carryforwards of $40,077 will begin to expire
in fiscal years 2010 through 2021, while the remaining $41,558
will expire in fiscal years beginning 2022. State tax credits of
$41 will expire in fiscal years 2010 through 2013, while the
remaining $81,179 is available indefinitely to reduce cash taxes
otherwise payable. As discussed above, most of the net operating
loss and tax credit carryovers, if realized, will be recognized
as additional paid in capital in that they are employee stock
option tax attributes.
During fiscal 2004, as part of our acquisition of Spinnaker, we
acquired approximately $52,000 and $12,000 of federal and state
net operating losses, respectively, and $2,700 of federal tax
credits that were realized as deferred tax assets upon
acquisition. We also established a valuation allowance of $2,400
against a portion of the state net operating loss carryforwards
of Spinnaker, which if utilized, will be treated as a reduction
of income tax expense.
During fiscal 2006, as part of our acquisition of Decru, we
acquired approximately $32,100 of federal net operating losses
and $1,100 of federal tax credits that were realized as deferred
tax assets upon acquisition. We also established valuation
reserves of $1,200 and $1,200 against all of Decrus state
net operating loss carryforwards and state tax credit
carryforwards, respectively, that existed as of the acquisition
date. If utilized, these attributes will be treated as a
reduction of income tax expense.
|
|
7.
|
Segment,
Geographic, and Significant Customer Information
|
Under SFAS No. 131, Disclosures about
Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information, we
operate in one reportable industry segment: the design,
manufacturing, marketing, and technical support of
high-performance networked storage solutions. We market our
products in the U.S. and in foreign countries through our
sales personnel and our subsidiaries. The Companys Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer are considered our
Chief Operating Decision Makers (CODMs), as defined
by SFAS No. 131. The CODMs evaluates resource
allocation decisions and operational performance based upon
revenue by geographic regions. Under SFAS No. 131, we
have one reportable segment, as our three geographic operating
segments can be aggregated into one reportable segment as they
have similar operating characteristics. For fiscal years 2009,
2008 and 2007, we recorded revenue from customers throughout the
U.S. and Canada, Europe, Latin America, Australia, and Asia
Pacific.
95
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents net revenues for the years ended
April 24, 2009, April 25, 2008, and April 27,
2007, by geographic area and long-lived assets as of
April 24, 2009, and April 25, 2008, by geographic area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Net Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
1,753,559
|
|
|
$
|
1,748,916
|
|
|
$
|
1,550,268
|
|
Other International
|
|
|
1,295,225
|
|
|
|
1,236,162
|
|
|
|
1,029,468
|
|
Germany
|
|
|
357,609
|
|
|
|
318,089
|
|
|
|
224,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
3,406,393
|
|
|
$
|
3,303,167
|
|
|
$
|
2,804,282
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-lived Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
1,891,198
|
|
|
$
|
1,837,586
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other International
|
|
|
142,837
|
|
|
|
165,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Long-lived Assets
|
|
$
|
2,034,035
|
|
|
$
|
2,003,555
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues above are attributed to geographic area based on
customers shipment locations.
International sales include export sales primarily to the United
Kingdom, Japan, France, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Canada,
and Australia. Germany accounted for 10.5% or more of net
revenues in fiscal 2009. No single foreign country accounted for
10% or more of net revenues in fiscal 2008 and 2007.
During fiscal 2009, two U.S. distributors accounted for
approximately 10.6% and 10.5% of our net revenues, respectively.
No customer accounted for ten percent of our net revenues during
fiscal 2008 and 2007.
|
|
8.
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
Effective April 26, 2008, we adopted
SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS No. 157), except as it applies to the
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities subject to
Financial Staff Position
SFAS No. 157-2.
SFAS No. 157 defines fair value as the price that
would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants
at the measurement date. As such, fair value is a market-based
measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that
market participants would use in pricing assets or liabilities.
When determining the fair value measurements for assets and
liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value,
we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which
these assets and liabilities would be transacted.
In October 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position
(FSP)
No. 157-3
Determining the Fair Value of a Financial Asset When
the Market for That Asset Is Not Active (FSP
No. 157-3).
FSP
No. 157-3
clarifies the application of SFAS No. 157, which we
adopted as of July 26, 2008, in situations where the market
is not active. The adoption of FSP
No. 157-3
did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial
position or results of operations.
In January 2009, the FASB issued FSP Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF)
No. 99-20-1,
Amendments to the Impairment Guidance of EITF Issue
99-20.
FSP EITF
No. 99-20-1
requires us to recognize other-than temporary impairments as a
realized loss through earnings when it is probable that there
has been an adverse change in estimated cash flows from the cash
flows previously projected. We adopted FSP
No. EITF 99-20-1
as of January 24, 2009. Adoption did not have a material
impact on our results of operations, financial position, or cash
flows.
96
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Fair
Value Hierarchy:
SFAS No. 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy that
requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and
minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair
value. The hierarchy which prioritizes the inputs used to
measure fair value from market based assumptions to entity
specific assumptions is as follows:
Level 1: observable inputs such as quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities,
and readily accessible by us at the reporting date;
Level 2: inputs other than the quoted
prices in active markets that are observable either directly or
indirectly in active markets; and
Level 3: unobservable inputs in which
there is little or no market data, which require us to develop
our own assumptions.
We consider an active market to be one in which transactions for
the asset or liability occur with sufficient frequency and
volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis, and
view an inactive market as one in which there are few
transactions for the asset or liability, the prices are not
current, or price quotations vary substantially either over time
or among market makers. Where appropriate our own or the
counterpartys non-performance risk is considered in
determining the fair values of liabilities and assets,
respectively.
The following table summarizes our financial assets and
liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis in
accordance with SFAS No. 157 as of April 24, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Active
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
486,667
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
486,667
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Trading securities
|
|
|
7,934
|
|
|
|
7,934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. government agency bonds
|
|
|
81,774
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,774
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasuries
|
|
|
32,635
|
|
|
|
32,635
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate securities
|
|
|
486,083
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
486,083
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit
|
|
|
115,085
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,085
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market funds
|
|
|
1,327,794
|
|
|
|
1,276,164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,630
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
66,537
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,537
|
|
Investment in nonpublic companies
|
|
|
3,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,969
|
|
Foreign currency contracts
|
|
|
6,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,614,677
|
|
|
$
|
1,316,733
|
|
|
$
|
1,175,808
|
|
|
$
|
122,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts
|
|
$
|
2,289
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,289
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Reported as:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Active
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets for
|
|
|
Observable
|
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents(1)
|
|
$
|
1,368,355
|
|
|
$
|
1,276,164
|
|
|
$
|
92,191
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
1,110,053
|
|
|
|
32,635
|
|
|
|
1,077,418
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading securities(2)
|
|
|
7,934
|
|
|
|
7,934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term investments(3)
|
|
|
122,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,136
|
|
Foreign currency contracts(4)
|
|
|
6,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,614,677
|
|
|
$
|
1,316,733
|
|
|
$
|
1,175,808
|
|
|
$
|
122,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts(5)
|
|
$
|
2,289
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,289
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Included in Cash and cash equivalents in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of April 24,
2009, in addition to $125,798 of cash. |
|
(2) |
|
Trading securities relate to a deferred compensation plan; $953
of the deferred compensation plan assets were included in
Prepaid expenses and other assets and $6,981 of the
deferred compensation plan assets were included in
Long-term deferred income taxes and other assets in
the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of
April 24, 2009. |
|
(3) |
|
Included in Long-term investments and restricted
cash in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of
April 24, 2009, in addition to $5,181 of long-term
restricted cash. |
|
(4) |
|
Included in Prepaid expenses and other assets in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of April 24,
2009. |
|
(5) |
|
Included in Other accrued liabilities in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of April 24,
2009. |
Our marketable securities include U.S. Treasury securities,
U.S. government agency bonds, corporate bonds, corporate
securities, auction rate securities, and money market funds,
including the Primary Fund and certificates of deposit. Cash
equivalents consist of instruments with remaining maturities of
three months or less at the date of purchase. The remaining
balance of cash equivalents consists primarily of certain money
market funds, for which the carrying amounts is a reasonable
estimate of fair value.
We classify investments within Level 1 if quoted prices are
available in active markets. Level 1 investments generally
include U.S. Treasury notes, trading securities with quoted
prices on active markets, and money market funds, with the
exception of the Primary Fund, which is classified in
Level 3.
We classify items in Level 2 if the investments are valued
using observable inputs to quoted market prices, benchmark
yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes or alternative
pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency.
These investments include: corporate bonds, corporate
securities, U.S. government agency bonds, certificates of
deposit, and foreign currency contracts. Investments are held by
a custodian who obtains investment prices from a third party
pricing provider that uses standard inputs to models which vary
by asset class. We corroborate the prices obtained from the
pricing service against other independent sources and, as of
April 24, 2009, have not found it necessary to make any
adjustments to the prices obtained. Included in Level 2 are
corporate bonds issued by Lehman Brothers.
98
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Our foreign currency forward exchange contracts are also
classified within Level 2. We determine the fair value of
these instruments by considering the estimated amount we would
pay or receive to terminate these agreements at the reporting
date. We use observable inputs, including quoted prices in
active markets for similar assets or liabilities. Foreign
currency contracts consist of forward foreign exchange contracts
for primarily the Euro, British pound, Canadian dollar, and
Australian dollar. Our foreign currency derivative contracts are
classified within Level 2 as the valuation inputs are based
on quoted market prices of similar instruments in active
markets. In fiscal 2009, net losses generated by hedged assets
and liabilities totaled $25,905, which were offset by gains on
the related derivative instruments of $20,872. In fiscal 2008,
net gains generated by hedged assets and liabilities totaled
$12,752, which were offset by losses on the related derivative
instruments of $13,487. In fiscal 2007, net gains generated by
hedged assets and liabilities totaled $5,180, which were offset
by losses on the related derivative instruments of $2,829.
We classify items in Level 3 if the investments are valued
using a pricing model or based on unobservable inputs in the
market. These investments include auction rate securities, the
Primary Fund and cost method investments.
The table below provides a reconciliation of our Level 3
financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis
using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) for
fiscal 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements
|
|
|
|
Using Significant
|
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Auction Rate
|
|
|
Private Equity
|
|
|
Nonpublic
|
|
|
|
Primary Fund
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Fund
|
|
|
Companies
|
|
|
Beginning balance at April 25, 2008
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
72,600
|
|
|
$
|
2,584
|
|
|
$
|
8,585
|
|
Total unrealized losses included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,241
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total realized losses included in earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,122
|
)
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
(6,284
|
)
|
Purchases, sales and settlements, net
|
|
|
(546,344
|
)
|
|
|
(700
|
)
|
|
|
(525
|
)
|
|
|
(355
|
)
|
Transfers to Level 3
|
|
|
597,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance at April 24, 2009
|
|
$
|
51,630
|
|
|
$
|
66,537
|
|
|
$
|
2,023
|
|
|
$
|
1,946
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of April 24, 2009, we have an investment in the Primary
Fund, an AAA-rated money market fund at the time of purchase,
with a par value of $60,928 and an estimated fair value of
$51,630, which suspended redemptions in September 2008 and is in
the process of liquidating its portfolio of investments. During
fiscal 2009, we recognized an other-than-temporary impairment
charge of $9,298, which was our pro rata share of the Primary
Funds overall investment in Lehman Brothers
securities. All amounts invested in the Primary Fund are
included in long-term investments given the lack of liquidity of
the fund and the uncertainty as to the timing and the amount of
the final distributions of the fund.
The Primary Fund investments were classified as Level 3 due
to lack of market data to determine fair value. We received
total distributions of $546,344 in fiscal 2009 from the Primary
Fund. Those proceeds have been invested in unrelated money
market funds. Our remaining investment in the Primary Fund as of
April 24, 2009 is $51,630.
As of April 24, 2009, we had auction rate securities with a
par value of $75,400 and an estimated fair value of $66,537.
Substantially all of our ARS are backed by pools of student
loans guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education.
During fiscal 2009, we recorded an other-than-temporary
impairment loss of $2,122, due to a decline in the estimated
fair values of certain of our ARS related to credit quality risk
and rating downgrades. Based on an analysis of the fair value
and marketability of these investments, we recorded temporary
impairment charges of approximately $7,037 as of April 24,
2009, partially offset by unrealized gains of $296, within other
comprehensive income (loss). We estimated the fair value for
each individual ARS using an income (discounted cash flow)
approach which incorporates both observable and unobservable
inputs to discount the expected future cash flows.
99
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Based on our ability to access our cash and other short-term
investments, our expected operating cash flows, and our other
sources of cash, we have the intent and ability to hold these
investments until recovery of par value. We will continue to
monitor our ARS investments in light of the current debt market
environment and evaluate our accounting for these investments
quarterly.
At April 24, 2009, we held $3,969 of other investments
consisting of a private equity fund and direct investments in
technology companies. These investments are accounted for using
the cost method under Accounting Principles Board
(APB) Opinion No. 18, The Equity
Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock.
During fiscal 2009, we recorded $6,320 of impairment charges on
certain of these investments and adjusted their carrying amount
to fair value, as we deemed the decline in the value of those
assets to be other-than-temporary. These cost method investments
fall within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, due to the
use of significant unobservable inputs to determine fair value,
as the investments are in privately held technology entities
without quoted market prices.
Other
Fair Value Disclosures
In accordance with SFAS No. 107, Disclosures
about Fair Value of Financial Instruments, we are
required to disclose the fair value of our long-term debt at
least annually or more frequently if the fair value has changed
significantly. Our convertible notes and debt are carried at
cost. The fair value of our debt also approximates its carrying
value as of April 25, 2008 based upon inputs that are
observable directly in active markets (Level 2). The
estimated fair value of the Notes was approximately $1,143,244
at April 24, 2009, based upon quoted market information
(Level 2).
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities (SFAS No. 159).
SFAS No. 159 provides companies the option (the
Fair Value Option) to measure certain financial
instruments and other items at fair value. Unrealized gains and
losses on items for which the Fair Value Option has been elected
are reported in earnings. SFAS No. 159 is effective
for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007,
although earlier adoption is permitted. Currently, we have
elected not to adopt the Fair Value Option under this
pronouncement.
The following table provides information about our foreign
exchange forward contracts and currency options contracts
outstanding on April 24, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Contract Value in
|
|
|
Fair Value in
|
|
Currency
|
|
Buy/Sell
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
USD
|
|
|
USD
|
|
|
Forward Contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EUR
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
126,245
|
|
|
$
|
166,863
|
|
|
$
|
166,860
|
|
GBP
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
46,578
|
|
|
$
|
68,217
|
|
|
$
|
68,239
|
|
CAD
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
24,713
|
|
|
$
|
20,458
|
|
|
$
|
20,459
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
15,943
|
|
|
$
|
15,942
|
|
AUD
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
34,661
|
|
|
$
|
24,947
|
|
|
$
|
24,943
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
17,569
|
|
|
$
|
17,569
|
|
100
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table provides information about our foreign
exchange forward contracts and currency options contracts
outstanding on April 25, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Contract Value in
|
|
|
Fair Value in
|
|
Currency
|
|
Buy/Sell
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
USD
|
|
|
USD
|
|
|
Forward Contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EUR
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
153,226
|
|
|
$
|
238,961
|
|
|
$
|
238,740
|
|
GBP
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
46,488
|
|
|
$
|
91,772
|
|
|
$
|
91,978
|
|
CAD
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
21,480
|
|
|
$
|
21,116
|
|
|
$
|
21,115
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
15,490
|
|
|
$
|
15,489
|
|
AUD
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
36,801
|
|
|
$
|
34,127
|
|
|
$
|
34,122
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
17,823
|
|
|
$
|
17,820
|
|
|
|
9.
|
Derivatives
and Hedging Activities
|
We use derivative instruments to manage exposures to foreign
currency risk. Our primary objective in holding derivatives is
to reduce the volatility of earnings and cash flows associated
with changes in foreign currency. The program is not designated
for trading or speculative purposes. Our derivatives expose us
to credit risk to the extent that the counterparties may be
unable to meet the terms of the agreement. We seek to mitigate
such risk by limiting our counterparties to major financial
institutions. In addition, the potential risk of loss with any
one counterparty resulting from this type of credit risk is
monitored on an ongoing basis. We also have in place a master
netting arrangement to mitigate the credit risk of our
counterparty and potentially to reduce our losses due to
counterparty nonperformance. All contracts have a maturity of
less than six months.
In accordance with SFAS No. 133
(SFAS No. 133), Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, we
recognize derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities
on the balance sheet at fair value. Changes in fair value (i.e.
gains or losses) of the derivatives are recorded as revenues or
other income (expense), or as accumulated other comprehensive
income (OCI). If the derivative is designated as a
hedge, depending on the nature of the exposure being hedged,
changes in fair value will either be offset against the change
in fair value of the hedged items through earnings or recognized
in other comprehensive income (loss) until the hedged item is
recognized in earnings. The ineffective portion of the hedge is
recognized in earnings immediately.
Currently, we do not enter into any foreign exchange forward
contracts to hedge exposures related to firm commitments or
nonmarketable investments. Our major foreign currency exchange
exposures and related hedging programs are described below:
Balance Sheet. We utilize monthly foreign
currency forward and options contracts to hedge exchange rate
fluctuations related to certain foreign monetary assets and
liabilities. These derivative instruments do not subject us to
material balance sheet risk due to exchange rate movements
because gains and losses on these derivatives are intended to
offset gains and losses on the assets and liabilities being
hedged and the net amount is included in earnings. In fiscal
2009, net loss generated by hedged assets and liabilities
totaled $25,905, which were offset by gains on the related
derivative instruments of $20,872, which includes time value
expense of $719 on cash flow revenue hedge contracts.
Forecasted Transactions. We use currency
forward contracts to hedge exposures related to forecasted sales
denominated in certain foreign currencies. These contracts are
designated as cash flow hedges and in general closely match the
underlying forecasted transactions in duration. The contracts
are carried on the balance sheet at fair value, and the
effective portion of the contracts gains and losses is
recorded as other comprehensive income (loss) until the
forecasted transaction occurs. When the forecasted transaction
occurs, we reclassify the related gain or loss on the cash flow
hedge to revenue. If the underlying forecasted transactions do
not occur, or it becomes probable that they will not occur, the
gain or loss on the related cash flow hedge is recognized
immediately in
101
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
earnings. We measure the effectiveness of hedges of forecasted
transactions on a monthly basis by comparing the fair values of
the designated currency forward contracts with the fair values
of the forecasted transactions. The ineffective portion of the
derivative hedging gain or loss as well as changes in the fair
value of the derivatives time value (which are excluded
from the assessment of hedge effectiveness) is recognized in
current period earnings. During fiscal 2009, no ineffectiveness
was recognized in earnings and the time value component in our
cash flow hedges of $719 was recognized as a reduction to other
income, (expenses), net.
Over the next twelve months, it is expected that $524 of
derivative net losses recorded in other comprehensive income
(OCI) as of April 24, 2009 will be reclassified
into earnings as an adjustment to sales revenue. The maximum
length of time over which forecasted foreign denominated sales
revenues are hedged is six months.
As of April 24, 2009, we had the following outstanding
currency forward contracts that were entered into to hedge
forecasted foreign denominated sales and our balance sheet
monetary asset and liability exposures:
Cash Flow
Hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
Buy/Sell
|
|
Notional
|
|
Euro (EUR)
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
$
|
39,960
|
|
British pound (GBP)
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
18,476
|
|
Balance
Sheet contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
Buy/Sell
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
Euro (EUR)
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
$
|
126,900
|
|
British pound (GBP)
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
49,763
|
|
Canadian dollar (CAD)
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
20,459
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Sell
|
|
|
|
15,942
|
|
Australia Dollar (AUD)
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
24,943
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Buy
|
|
|
|
17,569
|
|
We net derivative assets and liabilities in the consolidated
balance sheets to the extent that master netting arrangements
meet the requirements of FASB Interpretation No. 39,
Offsetting of Amounts Related to Certain Contracts
(Interpretation No. 39), as amended by FASB
Interpretation No. 41, Offsetting of Amounts
Related to Certain Repurchase and Reverse Repurchase
Agreements.
The fair value of derivative instruments in our consolidated
balance sheets as of April 24, 2009 was as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Values of Derivative Instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
Sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange forward contracts
|
|
Prepaid expense
and other assets
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
$
|
(542
|
)
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange forward contracts
|
|
Prepaid expense
and other assets
|
|
|
7,193
|
|
|
Accrued
expenses
|
|
|
(2,742
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,194
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(3,284
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The effect of derivative instruments designated as cash flow
hedges on our consolidated statements of operations for the year
ended April 24, 2009 was as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
Reclassified
|
|
Recognized in
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging Relationships
|
|
OCI(1)
|
|
from AOCI(2)
|
|
Income(3)
|
|
Foreign exchange forward contracts
|
|
$
|
3,280
|
|
|
$
|
2,509
|
|
|
$
|
(719
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amount recognized in OCI (effective portion). |
|
(2) |
|
Amount of gain (loss) reclassified from accumulated OCI into
income (effective portion) located in revenue. |
|
(3) |
|
No ineffectiveness was recognized during the year. Amount of
loss recognized in income on derivatives relate to the time
value amount being excluded from the effectiveness testing. Such
amount is located in interest and other income, net. |
The effect of derivative instruments not designated as hedges on
our consolidated statements of operations for the year ended
April 24, 2009 was as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
Derivatives Not Designated as Hedging Instruments
|
|
Recognized (*)
|
|
Foreign exchange forward contracts
|
|
$
|
21,591
|
|
|
|
|
(*) |
|
Amount of gain (loss) recognized in income located in interest
and other income (expense), net. |
|
|
10.
|
Employee
Benefit, Incentive Compensation Plans and Deferred
Compensation
|
We have established a 401(k) tax-deferred savings plan
(Savings Plan). Employees meeting the eligibility
requirements, as defined, may contribute specified percentages
of their salaries. We contributed $13,568, $12,241, and $10,920
for fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively to the Savings Plan.
All employees of the Company are eligible to participate in the
Incentive Compensation Plan (Incentive Plan)
provided that they meet certain requirements pursuant to the
Incentive Plan. Incentive Plan contributions totaled $66,178,
$56,632, and $56,722 in fiscal 2009, 2008 and 2007.
At April 24, 2009, we have marketable securities of $7,934
related to investments in debt and equity securities that are
held in a rabbi trust under non-qualified deferred compensation
plans. The total related deferred compensation liability was
$7,934 at April 24, 2009, of which $953 was classified as
other accrued liabilities and $6,981 was classified as other
long-term obligations in our consolidated balance sheets.
|
|
11.
|
Business
Combinations and Divestitures
|
We have acquired two companies over the last three fiscal years.
The total purchase price paid for each of these companies is
summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
Onaro
|
|
|
Topio
|
|
|
Cash consideration
|
|
$
|
104,524
|
|
|
$
|
136,852
|
|
Fair value of vested stock options assumed
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
|
|
8,369
|
|
Acquisition-related transaction costs
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
882
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
110,730
|
|
|
$
|
146,103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of vested stock options assumed
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
858
|
|
103
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In accordance with SFAS No. 141, we allocate the
purchase price to the estimated tangible and intangible assets
acquired and liabilities assumed, based on their estimated fair
values. The purchase price allocations are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
Onaro
|
|
|
Topio
|
|
|
Fair value of tangible assets acquired
|
|
$
|
10,410
|
|
|
$
|
7,905
|
|
Intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing Technology
|
|
|
23,900
|
|
|
|
18,800
|
|
Patents and Core Technology
|
|
|
5,500
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
Customer Relationships
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
8,300
|
|
Non compete agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Trademarks and tradenames
|
|
|
1,600
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
79,211
|
|
|
|
114,700
|
|
Fair value of liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(3,182
|
)
|
|
|
(2,752
|
)
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(11,709
|
)
|
|
|
(5,150
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
110,730
|
|
|
$
|
146,103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The historical operations of each of those entities were not
significant and accordingly no pro forma information has been
provided.
Acquisition
of Onaro
On January 28, 2008, we acquired Onaro, Inc.
(Onaro), a privately-held company based in Boston,
Massachusetts, that provided software solutions for enterprises
to increase service quality, return on storage, and compliance
by managing storage as a service. Goodwill of $79,211 was
recorded in connection with our acquisition of Onaro. The
acquisition gave our customers access to new storage service
management and change management capabilities. It allowed us to
help enterprise organizations increase data center and storage
network efficiencies by proactively managing and optimizing
storage service levels for availability and performance in
dynamic data center environments, using our cost-effective and
highly scalable modular storage systems.
We plan to further develop and extend Onaros service
management software technologies and build upon the foundation
that the Onaros software provides. In addition, Onaro has
an experienced and knowledgeable workforce and an existing
infrastructure. These opportunities, along with the ability to
leverage the Onaro workforce, were primary contributing factors
to the establishment of the purchase price, resulting in the
recognition of a significant amount of goodwill. The fair values
assigned to tangible and intangible assets acquired and
liabilities assumed were based on management estimates and
assumptions, and other information compiled by management that
utilized established valuation techniques appropriate for the
high-technology industry. Goodwill recorded as a result of this
acquisition is not expected to be deductible for tax purposes.
The net deferred income tax liability of $11,709 recorded in
connection with this acquisition is comprised of deferred tax
assets of $2,893, primarily related to net operating losses
incurred from inception through the acquisition date and a
deferred tax liability of $14,602 related to acquired intangible
assets.
As of the acquisition date, no amounts were allocated to
in-process research and development. In-process research and
development is dependent on the status of new projects on the
date the acquisition is consummated. Prior to the acquisition
date, Onaro had released new versions of its software products.
Accordingly, there were no substantive research and development
projects in process on the date the acquisition was consummated.
104
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Acquisition
of Topio
On December 7, 2006, we acquired Topio, Inc.
(Topio), a privately-held company based in
Santa Clara, California that developed and sold
enterprise-class software for data replication and rapid
recovery across the spectrum of locations, platforms and storage
that support an enterprise. The acquisition will continue to
expand our data protection portfolio and simplify the
replication of data from other storage arrays to our storage
systems.
Goodwill of $114,700 was recorded in connection with our
acquisition of Topio. The current and future potential of the
Topio technology will enable us to expand our data protection
portfolio and simplify the replication of data from other
storage arrays to our storage systems. In addition, Topio has an
experienced and knowledgeable workforce and an existing
infrastructure. These opportunities, along with the ability to
leverage the Topio workforce, were significant contributing
factors to the establishment of the purchase price, resulting in
the recognition of a significant amount of goodwill. The fair
values assigned to tangible and intangible assets acquired and
liabilities assumed are based on management estimates and
assumptions, and other information compiled by management that
utilized established valuation techniques appropriate for the
high-technology industry. Goodwill recorded as a result of this
acquisition is not expected to be deductible for tax purposes.
The net deferred income tax liability of $5,150 recorded in
connection with this acquisition is comprised of deferred tax
assets of $7,644 primarily related to net operating losses
incurred from inception through the acquisition date and a
deferred tax liability of $12,794 related to acquired intangible
assets.
Because Topio had recently introduced its products as of the
date of acquisition, no amount was allocated to in-process
research and development.
Divestiture
of NetCache
On September 11, 2006, we completed the sale of certain
assets of our NetCache product line to Blue Coat and agreed not
to compete in the market served by NetCache for a period of no
less than three years from and after September 11, 2006. We
received $23,914 in cash and 360 shares of Blue Coats
common stock with a fair value of $4,637 as of
September 11, 2006. In addition, we accrued $2,032 for
costs expected to be incurred to fulfill our engineering and
service contractual obligations. Because of these continuing
obligations, the NetCache sale did not qualify for presentation
as a discontinued operation. As a result of this divestiture, we
recorded a pre-tax gain of $25,339 in our income from operations
and a reduction of goodwill of $1,179. We recorded revenues of
$57,421 from NetCache products for fiscal 2007. The contribution
to operating income from these products was not significant.
|
|
12.
|
Goodwill
and Purchased Intangible Assets
|
Under SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, goodwill attributable to each of
our reporting units is required to be tested for impairment by
comparing the fair value of each reporting unit with its
carrying value. Our reporting units are the same as our
operating segments, as defined by SFAS No. 131,
Segment Reporting.
We evaluate the recoverability of goodwill annually, or more
frequently when events and circumstances occur indicating that
the recorded goodwill may be impaired. During fiscal 2009, we
experienced a decline in our stock price, resulting in a loss of
market capitalization. However, we determined that no events or
circumstances had occurred to indicate that an assessment was
necessary, other than our required annual assessment. As of
April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, there was no
impairment of goodwill. We will continue to monitor conditions
and changes in the global economy that could impact future
operating results of our reporting units. If the businesses
acquired fail to meet our expectations as set out at the time of
acquisition or if the market capitalization of our stock trades
at a
105
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
depressed level for an extended period of time, we could incur
significant impairment charges which could negatively impact our
financial results. Goodwill activity is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
April 27, 2007
|
|
$
|
601,056
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
(213
|
)
|
Additions
|
|
|
79,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
$
|
680,054
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
932
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
$
|
680,986
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fiscal 2008, we acquired Onaro and recorded goodwill of
$79,211 resulting from the allocation of the purchase price and
decreased goodwill by $213 relating to escrow funds received
from Topio purchase transaction. In fiscal 2009, we increased
goodwill by $932 relating to the tax benefits associated with
the subsequent exercise of previously vested assumed Spinnaker
and Onaro options.
The change in the net carrying amount of intangibles for the
periods ended April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008 is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24, 2009
|
|
|
April 25, 2008
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
90,075
|
|
|
$
|
83,009
|
|
Recognized in connection with acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,000
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
(29,414
|
)
|
|
|
(28,934
|
)
|
Impairment charges
|
|
|
(14,917
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
45,744
|
|
|
$
|
90,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible assets balances are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Identified Intangible Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patents
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
10,040
|
|
|
$
|
(9,891
|
)
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
$
|
10,040
|
|
|
$
|
(9,411
|
)
|
|
$
|
629
|
|
Existing technology
|
|
|
4 - 5
|
|
|
|
107,860
|
|
|
|
(71,210
|
)
|
|
|
36,650
|
|
|
|
126,660
|
|
|
|
(56,095
|
)
|
|
|
70,565
|
|
Trademarks/tradenames
|
|
|
2 - 7
|
|
|
|
6,600
|
|
|
|
(3,419
|
)
|
|
|
3,181
|
|
|
|
6,600
|
|
|
|
(2,328
|
)
|
|
|
4,272
|
|
Customer Contracts/relationships
|
|
|
1.5 - 8
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
|
|
(6,736
|
)
|
|
|
5,764
|
|
|
|
20,800
|
|
|
|
(6,191
|
)
|
|
|
14,609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Identified Intangible Assets, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
137,000
|
|
|
$
|
(91,256
|
)
|
|
$
|
45,744
|
|
|
$
|
164,100
|
|
|
$
|
(74,025
|
)
|
|
$
|
90,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense for identified intangibles is summarized
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Patents
|
|
$
|
479
|
|
|
$
|
1,982
|
|
|
$
|
1,982
|
|
Existing technology
|
|
|
24,515
|
|
|
|
22,582
|
|
|
|
17,581
|
|
Other identified intangibles
|
|
|
4,420
|
|
|
|
4,370
|
|
|
|
3,879
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
29,414
|
|
|
$
|
28,934
|
|
|
$
|
23,442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Our acquired patents are intended to enhance our technology base
to build next-generation network-attached storage, storage area
network, and fabric-attached storage systems for the benefit of
our enterprise customers. The costs of such patents for use in
research and development activities that have alternative future
uses have been capitalized and amortized over an estimated
useful life of five years as research and development expenses.
Existing technology is amortized as cost of product revenue.
Trademarks, tradenames, customer contracts and relationships are
amortized as sales and marketing expenses. Covenants not to
compete are amortized as general and administrative expenses.
In December 2008, we decided to cease development and
availability of our SnapMirror for Open Systems product. In
connection with this decision, we recorded charges of $14,917
attributable to the impairment of existing technology and
customer contracts/relationships related to our Topio
acquisition.
Based on the identified intangible assets recorded at
April 24, 2009, the future amortization expense of
identified intangibles for the next five fiscal years is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ending April,
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
2010
|
|
$
|
20,636
|
|
2011
|
|
|
11,701
|
|
2012
|
|
|
7,150
|
|
2013
|
|
|
4,963
|
|
2014
|
|
|
554
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
740
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
45,744
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.
|
Restructuring
and Other Charges
|
Fiscal
2009 Restructuring Plans
In February 2009, we announced our decision to execute a
worldwide restructuring program, which included a reduction in
workforce, the closing or downsizing of certain facilities, and
the establishment of a plan to outsource certain internal
activities. In December 2008, we announced our decision to cease
the development and availability of our
SnapMirror®
for Open Systems (SMOS) product, which was
originally acquired through our acquisition of Topio in fiscal
2007. As part of this decision, we also announced the closure of
our engineering facility in Haifa, Israel.
These restructuring activities resulted in restructuring charges
totaling $51,447 related to severance-related amounts and other
charges attributable to the termination of approximately 450
regular positions, abandoned excess facilities charges relating
to non-cancelable lease costs, which are net of expected
sublease income; contract cancellation charges; and outplacement
expenses, to support restructuring and fixed assets intangibles
write-offs; as well as $2,959 of other charges to support our
restructuring initiatives. In recording the facility lease
restructuring reserve, we made certain estimates and assumptions
related to the (i) time period over which the relevant
buildings would remain vacant, (ii) sublease terms, and
(iii) sublease rates.
As of April 24, 2009, approximately $15,896 of the costs
associated with these activities were unpaid. We expect that
severance-related charges and other costs will be substantially
paid by the third quarter of fiscal 2010 and the
facilities-related lease payments to be substantially paid by
the third quarter of fiscal 2013.
Fiscal
2002 Restructuring Plan
As of April 24, 2009, we also have $1,265 remaining in
facility restructuring reserves established as part of a
restructuring in fiscal 2002 related to future lease commitments
on exited facilities, net of expected sublease
107
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
income. We reevaluate our estimates and assumptions periodically
and make adjustments as necessary based on the time period over
which the facilities will be vacant, expected sublease terms,
and expected sublease rates. During fiscal 2009, we recorded
restructuring recoveries of $61 resulting from a change in the
estimated operating expenses relating to this facility
restructuring reserve. We expect to substantially fulfill the
remaining contractual obligations related to this facility
restructuring reserve by fiscal 2011.
The following table summarizes the provisions, respective
payments, and remaining accrued balance as of April 24,
2009 for charges incurred in fiscal year 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancellation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Intangible
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charges
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Write-off
|
|
|
Write-off
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Reserve balance at April 28, 2006
|
|
$
|
338
|
|
|
$
|
2,666
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,004
|
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
Cash payments and others
|
|
|
(264
|
)
|
|
|
(582
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(846
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve balance at April 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,084
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,084
|
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(607
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(607
|
)
|
Restructuring charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve balance at April 25, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,924
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,924
|
|
Restructuring and other charges
|
|
|
27,987
|
|
|
|
4,422
|
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
|
2,959
|
|
|
|
3,795
|
|
|
|
14,917
|
|
|
|
54,406
|
|
Cash payments
|
|
|
(17,640
|
)
|
|
|
(957
|
)
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
(1,783
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,505
|
)
|
Non-cash charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
284
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
(3,795
|
)
|
|
|
(14,917
|
)
|
|
|
(18,353
|
)
|
FX effect
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(227
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(311
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve balance at April 24, 2009
|
|
$
|
10,282
|
|
|
$
|
5,446
|
|
|
$
|
199
|
|
|
$
|
1,234
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of the reserve balance at April 24, 2009, $14,665 was
included in other accrued liabilities, and the remaining $2,496
was classified as other long-term obligations.
108
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
14.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
The following summarizes our commitments and contingencies at
April 24, 2009, and the effect such obligations may have on
our future periods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Office operating lease payments(1)
|
|
$
|
26,364
|
|
|
$
|
22,408
|
|
|
$
|
17,752
|
|
|
$
|
14,770
|
|
|
$
|
12,682
|
|
|
$
|
30,195
|
|
|
$
|
124,171
|
|
Real estate lease payments(2)
|
|
|
3,861
|
|
|
|
3,861
|
|
|
|
3,861
|
|
|
|
129,566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141,149
|
|
Equipment operating lease payments(3)
|
|
|
19,080
|
|
|
|
11,106
|
|
|
|
3,391
|
|
|
|
1,240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,817
|
|
Venture capital funding commitments(4)
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
319
|
|
Purchase Commitments with contract manufacturers(5)
|
|
|
83,689
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,689
|
|
Capital expenditures(6)
|
|
|
6,461
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,461
|
|
Communications and maintenance(7)
|
|
|
24,978
|
|
|
|
14,516
|
|
|
|
3,561
|
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Contractual Cash Obligations
|
|
$
|
164,593
|
|
|
$
|
52,038
|
|
|
$
|
28,577
|
|
|
$
|
146,018
|
|
|
$
|
12,682
|
|
|
$
|
30,195
|
|
|
$
|
434,103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Commercial Commitments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters of credit(8)
|
|
$
|
4,816
|
|
|
$
|
203
|
|
|
$
|
320
|
|
|
$
|
60
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
522
|
|
|
$
|
5,921
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We enter into operating leases in the normal course of business.
We lease sales offices and research and development facilities
under operating leases throughout the United States and
internationally, which expire on various dates through fiscal
year 2019. Substantially all lease agreements have fixed payment
terms based on the passage of time and contain payment
escalation clauses. Some lease agreements provide us with the
option to renew or terminate the associated lease. Our future
operating lease obligations would change if we were to exercise
these options and if we were to enter into additional operating
lease agreements. Facilities operating lease payments exclude
the leases impacted by the restructurings described in
Note 13. Total rent expense for all facilities was $28,805
for year ended April 24, 2009, and $29,586 and $23,986 for
years ended April 25, 2008 and April 27, 2007,
respectively. |
|
(2) |
|
Included in real estate lease payments pursuant to four
financing arrangements with BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation
(BNPPLC) are (i) lease commitments of $3,861 in
each of the fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012; $2,448 in fiscal
2013; and none in fiscal 2014, which are based on the LIBOR rate
at April 24, 2009 plus a spread or a fixed rate, for terms
of five years; and (ii) at the expiration or termination of
the lease, a supplemental payment obligation equal to our
minimum guarantee of $127,118 in the event that we elect not to
purchase or arrange for sale of the buildings. |
|
(3) |
|
Equipment operating leases include servers and IT equipment used
in our engineering labs and data centers. |
|
(4) |
|
Venture capital funding commitments include a quarterly
committed management fee based on a percentage of our committed
funding to be payable through June 2011. |
|
(5) |
|
Contract manufacturer commitments consist of obligations for on
hand inventories and non-cancelable purchase order with our
contract manufacturer . We record a liability for firm,
noncancelable, and nonreturnable purchase commitments for
quantities in excess of our future demand forecasts, which is
consistent with the valuation of our excess and obsolete
inventory. As of April 24, 2009, the liability for these
purchase commitments in excess of future demand was approximate
$3,200 and is recorded in other current liabilities. |
109
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
(6) |
|
Capital expenditures include worldwide contractual commitments
to purchase equipment and to construct buildings and leasehold
improvements, which will ultimately be recorded as property and
equipment. |
|
(7) |
|
Communication and maintenance represents payments we are
required to make based on minimum volumes under certain
communication contracts with major telecommunication companies
as well as maintenance contracts with multiple vendors. Such
obligations expire in September 2012. |
|
(8) |
|
The amounts outstanding under these letters of credit relate to
workers compensation, a customs guarantee, a corporate
credit card program, foreign rent guarantees, and surety bonds,
which were primarily related to self-insurance. |
Real
Estate Leases
We have commitments related to four lease arrangements with
BNPPLC for approximately 564,274 square feet of office
space for our headquarters in Sunnyvale, California. As of
April 24, 2009, we have a leasing arrangement
(Leasing Arrangements 1) which requires us to lease
land in Sunnyvale to BNPPLC for a period of 99 years and to
lease approximately 190,000 square feet of space costing up
to $48,500. As of April 24, 2009, we also have commitments
relating to financing and operating leasing arrangements with
BNPPLC (Leasing Arrangements 2, 3, 4) for land and
approximately 374,274 square feet of buildings located in
Sunnyvale, California, costing up to $101,050. Under these
leasing arrangements, we began paying BNPPLC minimum lease
payments, which vary based on LIBOR plus a spread or a fixed
rate on the costs of the facilities on the respective lease
commencement dates. We will make payments for each of the leases
for a term of five years. We have the option to renew each of
the leases for two consecutive five-year periods upon approval
by BNPPLC. Upon expiration (or upon any earlier termination) of
the lease terms, we must elect one of the following options:
(i) purchase the buildings from BNPPLC at cost;
(ii) if certain conditions are met, arrange for the sale of
the buildings by BNPPLC to a third party for an amount equal to
at least 85% of the costs (residual guarantee), and be liable
for any deficiency between the net proceeds received from the
third party and such amounts; or (iii) pay BNPPLC
supplemental payments for an amount equal to at least 85% of the
costs (residual guarantee), in which event we may recoup some or
all of such payments by arranging for a sale of each or all
buildings by BNPPLC during the ensuing two-year period. The
following table summarizes the costs, the residual guarantee,
the applicable LIBOR plus spread or fixed rate at April 24,
2009, and the date we began to make payments for each of our
leasing arrangements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIBOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plus
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
|
|
Leasing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residual
|
|
|
Spread or
|
|
|
Commencement
|
|
|
|
|
Arrangements
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Guarantee
|
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
48,500
|
|
|
$
|
41,225
|
|
|
|
3.99
|
%
|
|
|
January 2008
|
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
79,950
|
|
|
$
|
67,958
|
|
|
|
1.36
|
%
|
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
10,475
|
|
|
$
|
8,904
|
|
|
|
3.97
|
%
|
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
10,625
|
|
|
$
|
9,031
|
|
|
|
3.99
|
%
|
|
|
December 2007
|
|
|
|
5 years
|
|
All leases require us to maintain specified financial covenants
with which we were in compliance as of April 24, 2009. Such
specified financial covenants include a maximum ratio of Total
Debt to Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and
Amortization (EBITDA) and a minimum amount of
Unencumbered Cash and Short-Term Investments.
On April 1, 2009, we terminated two leasing arrangement in
connection with two buildings located in Sunnyvale, California
and Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, and repaid $119,297
of the outstanding balance under the leasing arrangements, a
portion of which is included in construction-in-progress at
April 24, 2009.
On December 1, 2008, we terminated a leasing arrangement in
connection with a separate building located in Sunnyvale,
California and repaid $8,080 of the outstanding balance drawn
under the construction allowance. As a
110
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
result of these terminations, we are no longer contractually
obligated to pay lease payments for the lease periods and the
residual guarantees.
Guarantees
As of April 24, 2009, our financial guarantees consisted of
standby letters of credit outstanding, bank guarantees, foreign
rent guarantees, service performance guarantees, customs and
duties guarantees, VAT requirements, workers compensation
plans and surety bonds, which were primarily related to self
insurance. The maximum amount of potential future payments under
these arrangements was $12,104 as of April 24, 2009, of
which $1,001 and $5,182 were collateralized as short-term and
long-term restricted cash and investments, respectively, on our
balance sheet. The maximum amount of potential future payments
under these arrangements was $253,350 as of April 25, 2008, of
which $2,953 and $247,234 were collateralized by short-term and
long-term restricted cash, respectively, on our consolidated
balance sheets.
Warranty
Reserve
We provide customers a warranty on software of ninety days and a
warranty on hardware with terms ranging from one to three years.
Estimated future warranty costs are expensed as a cost of
product revenues when revenue is recognized, based on estimates
of the costs that may be incurred under our warranty obligations
including material, distribution and labor costs. Our accrued
liability for estimated future warranty costs is included in
other accrued liabilities and other long-term obligations on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Factors that affect
our warranty liability include the number of installed units,
estimated material costs, estimated distribution costs and
estimated labor costs. We periodically assess the adequacy of
our warranty accrual and adjust the amount as considered
necessary. During fiscal year 2009, 2008, and 2007, we accrued
warranty charges of $25,909, $26,997 and $22,082, respectively.
As of April 24, 2009 and April 25, 2008, our warranty
reserve accrual balances were $42, 325 and $42,815, respectively.
Recourse
and Nonrecourse Leases
We have both recourse and nonrecourse lease financing
arrangements with third-party leasing companies through
preexisting relationships with customers. Under the terms of
recourse leases, which are generally three years or less, we
remain liable for the aggregate unpaid remaining lease payments
to the third-party leasing company in the event that any
customers default. These arrangements are generally
collateralized by a security interest in the underlying assets.
For these recourse arrangements, revenues on the sale of our
product to the leasing company are deferred and recognized into
income as payments to the leasing company are received. As of
April 24, 2009, and April 25, 2008, the maximum
recourse exposure under such leases totaled approximately
$25,682 and $24,842, respectively. Under the terms of the
nonrecourse leases, we do not have any continuing obligations or
liabilities. To date, we have not experienced material losses
under our lease financing programs.
Purchase
Commitments
In the normal course of business we make commitments to our
third party contract manufacturers, to manage manufacturer lead
times and meet product forecasts, and to other parties, to
purchase various key components used in the manufacture of our
products. We establish accruals for estimated losses on
purchased components for which we believe it is probable that
they will not be utilized in future operations. To the extent
that such forecasts are not achieved, our commitments and
associated accruals may change.
Indemnification
agreements
We enter into standard indemnification agreements in the
ordinary course of business. Pursuant to these agreements, we
agree to defend and indemnify the other party
primarily our customers or business partners or subcontractors
for damages and reasonable costs incurred in any
suit or claim brought against them alleging that
111
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
our products sold to them infringe any U.S. patent,
copyright, trade secret, or similar right. If a product becomes
the subject of an infringement claim, we may, at our option:
(i) replace the product with another noninfringing product
that provides substantially similar performance;
(ii) modify the infringing product so that it no longer
infringes but remains functionally equivalent; (iii) obtain
the right for the customer to continue using the product at our
expense and for the reseller to continue selling the product;
(iv) take back the infringing product and refund to
customer the purchase price paid less depreciation amortized on
a straight-line basis. We have not been required to make
material payments pursuant to these provisions historically. We
have not recorded any liability at April 24, 2009, and
April 25, 2008, respectively, related to these guarantees
since the maximum amount of potential future payments under such
guarantees, indemnities and warranties is not determinable,
other than as described above.
Legal
Contingencies
We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims which may
arise in the normal course of business. While the outcome of
these legal matters is currently not determinable, we do not
believe that any current litigation or claims will have a
material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, operating
results, or financial condition.
In April 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement with the
United States of America, acting through the United States
Department of Justice (DOJ) and on behalf of the
General Services Administration (the GSA), under
which we agreed to pay the United States $128,000, plus interest
of $715, related to a dispute regarding our discount practices
and compliance with the price reduction clause provisions of GSA
contracts between August 1997 and February 2005.
On September 5, 2007, we filed a patent infringement
lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas seeking compensatory
damages and a permanent injunction against Sun Microsystems. On
October 25, 2007, Sun Microsystems filed a counter claim
against us in the Eastern District of Texas seeking compensatory
damages and a permanent injunction. On October 29, 2007,
Sun filed a second lawsuit against us in the Northern District
of California asserting additional patents against us. The Texas
court granted a joint motion to transfer the Texas lawsuit to
the Northern District of California on November 26, 2007.
On March 26, 2008, Sun filed a third lawsuit in federal
court that extends the patent infringement charges to storage
management technology we acquired in January 2008. The three
lawsuits are currently in the discovery phase and no trial date
has been set, so we are unable at this time to determine the
likely outcome of these various patent litigations. Since we are
unable to reasonably estimate the amount or range of any
potential settlement, no accrual has been recorded as of
April 24, 2009.
On May 20, 2009, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of
Merger (the merger agreement) by and among us, Kentucky Merger
Sub One Corporation, our wholly owned subsidiary, referred to as
Merger Sub One, Derby Merger Sub Two LLC, our wholly owned
subsidiary, referred to as Merger Sub Two, and Data Domain. The
merger agreement was subsequently amended on June 3, 2009
to reflect the terms described below. The merger agreement
provides for the acquisition of Data Domain by NetApp by means
of a merger of Merger Sub One with and into Data Domain,
referred to as the first-step merger, with Data Domain as the
interim surviving entity, immediately followed by a merger of
Data Domain, as the interim surviving entity, with and into
Merger Sub Two, referred to as the second-step merger, with
Merger Sub Two as the final surviving entity.
Upon the completion of the first-step merger, Data Domain will
become our wholly owned subsidiary, and each share of Data
Domain common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to
the completion of the first-step merger, will be cancelled and
converted into the right to receive, subject to adjustment as
described below, a combination of $16.45 in cash, or the cash
consideration, without interest and less any required
withholding, and a certain number of shares of our common stock,
or the stock consideration, and together with the cash
consideration, the merger consideration. The number of shares of
our common stock issuable in exchange for Data Domain common
stock will be determined by dividing $13.55 by the closing
average, defined as the average closing price of our common
stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the 10 consecutive
trading days ending on the third
112
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
trading day immediately prior to the closing date of the
first-step merger; provided, that if the closing average is less
than $17.41, each share of Data Domain common stock will be
exchangeable for 0.7783 shares of our common stock and if
the closing average is greater than $21.27, each share of Data
Domain common stock will be exchangeable for 0.637 shares
of our common stock. In the event that the exchange ratio is
greater than or equal to 0.7006 and less than 0.7783, we may
(a) reduce the stock consideration by such amount as we may
determine and (b) increase the cash consideration by an
amount equal to the product of (i) the amount of such
reduction in the stock consideration multiplied by (ii) the
closing average. However, we may not reduce the amount of the
stock consideration and increase the cash consideration as
described in the immediately preceding sentence to the extent
that it would reasonably be expected to cause the merger to fail
to qualify as a tax-free reorganization under the Internal
Revenue Code. In addition, if the aggregate amount of the stock
consideration issuable in the merger (including the stock
consideration issuable to holders of Data Domain options and
restricted stock units) would exceed 19.5% of the outstanding
shares of our common stock immediately prior to the effective
time of the first-step merger, the stock consideration will be
decreased to the minimum extent necessary so that no more than
19.5% of the outstanding shares of our common stock will be
issued in the merger (with such percentage measured immediately
prior to the effective time of the first-step merger). In such
event, the cash consideration will be increased by an amount
equal to the product of (a) the amount of the reduction in
the stock consideration multiplied by (b) the closing
average. In the event that the stock consideration is decreased
in accordance with the immediately preceding sentence, the
merger may fail to qualify as a tax-free reorganization under
the Internal Revenue Code.
Upon the completion of the first-step merger, each outstanding
Data Domain stock option, whether or not then vested and
exercisable, will be assumed and converted by us. In accordance
with its terms and the requirements of applicable law, each
option shall (i) be converted into an option to acquire
that number of shares of our common stock equal to the product
obtained by multiplying (x) the number of shares of Data
Domain common stock subject to such option, by (y) the
option exchange ratio, rounded down to the nearest whole share,
and (ii) have an exercise price per share equal to the
quotient obtained by dividing (x) the per share exercise
price of Data Domain common stock subject to such option, by
(y) the option exchange ratio, rounded up to the nearest
cent. The option exchange ratio is calculated as the sum of
(x) the stock consideration to be received pursuant to the
merger agreement for a share of Data Domain common stock plus
(y) the quotient obtained by dividing (1) the cash
consideration to be received pursuant to the merger agreement
for a share of Data Domain common stock, by (2) the average
closing sales prices of our common stock, rounded to the nearest
one-hundredth of a cent, for the ten most recent consecutive
trading days ending on the third trading day immediately prior
to the effective time of the merger. Each assumed and converted
option shall otherwise be subject to the same terms and
conditions (including as to vesting and exercisability) as were
applicable to the option immediately prior to the completion of
the first-step merger.
Each of Data Domains unvested restricted stock units and
shares of restricted stock outstanding at the effective time of
the first-step merger shall be assumed and converted into
restricted stock units or shares of restricted stock, as
applicable, representing the right to receive merger
consideration payable for shares of Data Domain underlying each
assumed and converted restricted stock unit or restricted share,
as applicable. Each assumed and converted restricted stock unit
and share of restricted stock shall otherwise be subject to the
same terms and conditions, including vesting restrictions, as
were applicable to such award immediately prior to the
completion of the first-step merger.
113
NETAPP,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The merger is subject to customary closing conditions, including
regulatory approvals. The transaction is valued at approximately
$2 billion and is expected to be completed in 60 to
120 days.
|
|
16.
|
Selected
Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 24, 2009
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
868,776
|
|
|
$
|
911,631
|
|
|
$
|
746,343
|
|
|
$
|
879,643
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
516,648
|
|
|
|
546,156
|
|
|
|
393,216
|
|
|
|
533,895
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
37,672
|
|
|
|
49,182
|
|
|
|
(75,392
|
)
|
|
|
75,083
|
|
Net income per share, basic
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
(0.23
|
)
|
|
|
0.23
|
|
Net income per share, diluted
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
(0.23
|
)
|
|
|
0.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended April 25, 2008
|
|
|
|
Q1
|
|
|
Q2
|
|
|
Q3
|
|
|
Q4
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
689,235
|
|
|
$
|
792,198
|
|
|
$
|
884,003
|
|
|
$
|
937,731
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
417,197
|
|
|
|
484,005
|
|
|
|
539,302
|
|
|
|
572,872
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
34,337
|
|
|
|
83,758
|
|
|
|
101,823
|
|
|
|
89,820
|
|
Net income per share, basic
|
|
|
0.09
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
|
|
0.26
|
|
Net income per share, diluted
|
|
|
0.09
|
|
|
|
0.23
|
|
|
|
0.29
|
|
|
|
0.26
|
|
114
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
|
|
(a)
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
|
Disclosure Controls are procedures designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under
the Exchange Act, such as this Annual Report, is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and forms. Disclosure Controls are also
designed to ensure that such information is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including the CEO and CFO, as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure
controls and procedures, as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as of the
end of the period covered by this report (the Evaluation
Date). Based on this evaluation, our principal executive
officer and principal financial officer concluded as of the
Evaluation Date that our disclosure controls and procedures were
effective such that the information relating to NetApp,
including our consolidated subsidiaries, required to be
disclosed in our Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) reports (i) is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC
rules and forms, and (ii) is accumulated and communicated
to NetApps management, including our principal executive
officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
|
|
(b)
|
Managements
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
|
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in Exchange Act
Rule 13a-15(f).
Our 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. 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.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our principal executive officer and
principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
based on the criteria established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO). Based on this assessment, our management concluded that,
as of April 24, 2009, our internal control over financial
reporting was effective based on those criteria.
The effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting as of April 24, 2009 has been audited by
Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered
public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is
included herein.
|
|
(c)
|
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
|
There were no changes in our internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act) identified in connection with
managements evaluation during our last fiscal quarter that
have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially
effect, our internal control over financial reporting.
115
|
|
(d)
|
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
NetApp, Inc.
Sunnyvale, California
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of
NetApp, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively, the
Company) as of April 24, 2009, based on
criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The Companys
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 by, or under the supervision of, the
companys principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the companys board of directors, management, and other
personnel 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 the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of April 24, 2009, based on the criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial
statement schedule as of and for the year ended April 24,
2009 of the Company and our report dated June 16, 2009
expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements
and financial statement schedule.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
June 16, 2009
116
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the Registrant
|
The information required by this Item with respect to the
Companys executive officers is incorporated herein by
reference from the information under Item 1 of Part I
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
under the section entitled Executive Officers. The
information required by this Item with respect to the
Companys directors is incorporated herein by reference
from the information provided under the heading Election
of Directors in the Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders which will be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission. The information required by
Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is incorporated herein by reference from the information
provided under the heading Section 16(a) Beneficial
Ownership Reporting Compliance in the Proxy Statement for
the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
We have adopted a written code of ethics that applies to our
Board of Directors and all of our employees, including our
principal executive officer, principal financial officer and
principal accounting officer. A copy of the code is available on
our website at
http://www.netapp.com.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
Information regarding the compensation of executive officers and
directors of the Company is incorporated by reference from the
information under the heading Executive Compensation and
Related Information in our Proxy Statement for the 2009
Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management
|
Information regarding security ownership of certain beneficial
owners and management is incorporated by reference from the
information under the heading Security Ownership of
Certain Beneficial Owners and Management in our Proxy
Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions
|
Information regarding certain relationships and related
transactions is incorporated by reference from the information
under the caption Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-In-Control
Agreements in our Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference from the information under the caption Audit
Fees in our Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders.
With the exception of the information incorporated in
Items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 of this Annual Report of
Form 10-K,
NetApps Proxy Statement is not deemed filed as
part of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
See the Exhibit Index immediately following
Schedule II of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
117
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Company has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized, on June 16, 2009.
NETAPP, INC.
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ DANIEL
J. WARMENHOVEN
|
Daniel J. Warmenhoven
Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature
appears below constitutes and appoints Daniel J. Warmenhoven and
Steven J. Gomo, and each of them, as his true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution
and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in
any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments
(including post-effective amendments) to this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other
documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to
be done in connection therewith, as fully to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of
them, or their or his substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to
be done by virtue thereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the Company and in the capacities and on the dates
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DANIEL
J. WARMENHOVEN
Daniel
J. Warmenhoven
|
|
Chief Executive Officer,
Chairman of the Board, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DONALD
T. VALENTINE
Donald
T. Valentine
|
|
Lead Independent Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ STEVEN
J. GOMO
Steven
J. Gomo
|
|
Executive Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ TOM
GEORGENS
Tom
Georgens
|
|
President, Chief Operating Officer, Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ALAN
EARHART
Alan
Earhart
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ NICHOLAS
G. MOORE
Nicholas
G. Moore
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ MARK
LESLIE
Mark
Leslie
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT
T. WALL
Robert
T. Wall
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ GEORGE
T. SHAHEEN
George
T. Shaheen
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JEFFRY
R. ALLEN
Jeffry
R. Allen
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ EDWARD
KOZEL
Edward
Kozel
|
|
Director
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
119
SCHEDULE II.
NETAPP,
INC.
VALUATION
AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
Years Ended April 24, 2009, April 25, 2008, and
April 27, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
(Credited) to
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
Reductions
|
|
|
at End of
|
|
Description
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
and Write-offs
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
$
|
2,439
|
|
|
$
|
1,146
|
|
|
$
|
517
|
|
|
$
|
3,068
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
2,572
|
|
|
$
|
818
|
|
|
$
|
951
|
|
|
$
|
2,439
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
2,380
|
|
|
$
|
928
|
|
|
$
|
736
|
|
|
$
|
2,572
|
|
120
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1(5)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of November 3, 2003,
by and among NetApp, Inc., Nagano Sub, Inc., and Spinnaker
Networks, Inc.
|
|
2
|
.2(10)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated as of
June 15, 2005, by and among NetApp Inc., Dolphin
Acquisition Corp., and Decru, Inc.
|
|
2
|
.3(28)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of May 20, 2009, by
and among the Company, Kentucky Merger Sub One Corporation,
Derby Merger Sub Two LLC and Data Domain, Inc.
|
|
2
|
.4(28)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated
June 3, 2009, by and among the Company, Kentucky Merger Sub
One Corporation, Derby Merger Sub Two LLC and Data
Domain, Inc.
|
|
3
|
.1(22)
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of the Company, as amended.
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Bylaws of the Company, as amended.
|
|
4
|
.2(26)
|
|
Indenture for 1.75% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2013,
dated as of June 10, 2008, by and 3.2. between U.S. Bank
National Association, as Trustee, and the Company.
|
|
4
|
.3(26)
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of June 10, 2008,
by and among Goldman, Sachs & Co., Morgan
Stanley & Co. Incorporated and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.1(23)*
|
|
The Companys Amended and Restated Employee Stock Purchase
Plan.
|
|
10
|
.2(2)*
|
|
The Companys Amended and Restated 1995 Stock Incentive
Plan.
|
|
10
|
.3(25)*
|
|
The Companys Amended and Restated 1999 Stock Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.4(4)
|
|
Patent Cross License Agreement, dated as of October 1,
2000, by and between Intel Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.5(1)*
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement (for directors and executive
officers).
|
|
10
|
.6(6)*
|
|
Spinnaker Networks, Inc. 2000 Stock Plan.
|
|
10
|
.7(8)*
|
|
Alacritus, Inc. 2005 Stock Plan.
|
|
10
|
.8(7)*
|
|
The Companys Fiscal Year 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan.
|
|
10
|
.9(9)*
|
|
The Companys Deferred Compensation Plan.
|
|
10
|
.10(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1995 Stock Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.11(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1995 Stock Option Plan
(Chairman of the Board or any Board Committee Chairperson).
|
|
10
|
.12(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1995 Stock Option Plan
(Restricted Stock Agreement).
|
|
10
|
.13(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(Restricted Stock Unit Agreement).
|
|
10
|
.14(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.15(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(China).
|
|
10
|
.16(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(Non-Employee Director Automatic Stock Option
Annual).
|
|
10
|
.17(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(Non-Employee Director Automatic Stock Option
Initial).
|
|
10
|
.18(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(France).
|
|
10
|
.19(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(India).
|
|
10
|
.20(14)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(United Kingdom).
|
|
10
|
.21(11)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Grant Notice and Option Agreement under the
Decru, Inc. Amended and Restated 2001 Equity Incentive Plan and
the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan filed under Attachment II.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.22(11)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Grant Notice and Option Agreement under the
Decru, Inc. 2001 Equity Incentive Plan and the 2001 Equity
Incentive Plan filed under Attachment II.
|
|
10
|
.23(11)
|
|
Form of Early Exercise Stock Purchase Agreement under the Decru,
Inc. 2001 Equity Incentive Plan.
|
|
10
|
.24(11)
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Bonus Grant Notice and Agreement under
the Decru, Inc. 2001 Equity Incentive Plan.
|
|
10
|
.25(12)
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated June 20, 2003, by and
between Auspex Systems, Inc. and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.26(13)
|
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated July 27, 2004 by and
between Cisco Systems, Inc. and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.27(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Closing Certificate and Agreement (Building
7), dated November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas
Leasing Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.28(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Construction Agreement (Building 7), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.29(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Lease Agreement (Building 7), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.30(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement
(Building 7), dated November 29, 2007, by and between BNP
Paribas Leasing Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.31(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement (Building 7), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.32(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Ground Lease (Building 7), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.33(22)
|
|
First Modification Agreement (Building 7), dated as of
April 9, 2008, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.34(15)
|
|
Loan Agreement, dated March 31, 2006, by and among the
Lenders party thereto, JP Morgan Chase Bank, National
Association, as administrative agent, and Network Appliance
Global Ltd.
|
|
10
|
.35(16)*
|
|
SANPro Systems, Inc. 2001 U.S. Stock Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.36(16)*
|
|
Topio, Inc. 2004 Israeli Share Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.37(17)
|
|
Master Confirmation, dated March 19, 2007, by and between
JP Morgan Securities Inc. and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.38(19)
|
|
Master Confirmation, dated August 13, 2007, by and between
Bank of America, N.A. and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.39(20)
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated November 2, 2007, by and among the
Lenders party thereto, Bank of America, N.A., Citicorp USA, Inc.
and Standard Chartered Bank as co-documentation agents,
BNP Paribas, as syndication agent, JP Morgan Chase Bank,
National Association, as administration agent, and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.40(20)
|
|
Closing Certificate and Agreement (Moffett Business Center),
dated November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.41(21)
|
|
Lease Agreement (Moffett Business Center), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.42(21)
|
|
Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement (Moffett Business
Center), dated November 29, 2007, by and between BNP
Paribas Leasing Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.43(21)
|
|
Purchase Agreement (Moffett Business Center), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.44(23)
|
|
First Modification Agreement (Moffett Business Center), dated as
of April 9, 2008, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.45(21)
|
|
Closing Certificate and Agreement (1299 Orleans), dated
November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.46(21)
|
|
Lease Agreement (1299 Orleans), dated November 29, 2007, by
and between BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.47(21)
|
|
Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement (1299 Orleans),
dated November 29, 2007, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.48(21)
|
|
Purchase Agreement (1299 Orleans), dated November 29, 2007,
by and between BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.49(23)
|
|
First Modification Agreement (1299 Orleans), dated as of
April 9, 2008, by and between BNP Paribas Leasing
Corporation and the Company.
|
|
10
|
.50(23)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Unsecured Credit Agreement dated
April 10, 2008 by and between JPMorgan Chase Bank and the
Company.
|
|
10
|
.51(22)*
|
|
Onaro, Inc. Amended and Restated 2002 Stock Option and Incentive
Plan (including Appendix Israeli Taxpayers).
|
|
10
|
.52(23)
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement approved for use under the
Companys amended and restated 1999 Stock Option Plan
(Israel).
|
|
10
|
.53(19)*
|
|
The Companys Executive Compensation Plan.
|
|
10
|
.54(25)
|
|
Change of Control Severance Agreements (CEO)
|
|
10
|
.55(25)
|
|
Form of Change of Control Severance Agreements (Non-CEO
Executives)
|
|
10
|
.56(28)
|
|
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 9).
|
|
10
|
.57
|
|
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8).
|
|
10
|
.58
|
|
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center).
|
|
10
|
.59
|
|
Notice of Termination of Secured Credit Agreement dated
October 5, 2007 with J.P.Morgan Chase Bank, National
Association, as administrative agent.
|
|
10
|
.60(27)
|
|
Form of Convertible Bond Hedge Confirmation.
|
|
10
|
.61(27)
|
|
Form of Warrant Confirmation.
|
|
10
|
.62(27)
|
|
Form of Amendment to Warrant Confirmation.
|
|
10
|
.63(29)
|
|
Form of Voting Agreement entered into on May 20, 2009 by
the Company and each director and executive officer of Data
Domain, Inc. (and certain affiliates thereof).
|
|
10
|
.64(30)
|
|
Orca Systems, Inc. 1999 Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan
|
|
10
|
.65(31)
|
|
WebManage Technologies, Inc. 1999 Stock Option Plan.
|
|
10
|
.66(31)
|
|
WebManage Technologies, Inc. 2000 Stock Incentive Plan.
|
|
10
|
.68
|
|
Settlement Agreement entered into among the U.S.A, acting
through the United States Department of Justice and on behalf of
the General Services Administration, the Company and Igor
Kapuscinski.
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Company.
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
24
|
.1
|
|
Power of Attorney (see signature page).
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
Section 302(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
Section 302(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(No. 33-97864). |
|
(2) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Proxy
Statement dated August 21, 1998. |
|
(3) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated March 11, 1999. |
|
(4) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated March 12, 2001. |
|
(5) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated February 27, 2004. |
|
(6) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form S-8
registration statement dated March 1, 2004. |
|
(7) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated May 18, 2005. |
|
(8) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form S-8
registration statement dated June 2, 2005. |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated July 7, 2005. |
|
(10) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Proxy
Statement dated July 8, 2005. |
|
(11) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated May 19, 2006. |
|
(12) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated September 3, 2003. |
|
(13) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated August 31, 2004. |
|
(14) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
dated July 8, 2005. |
|
(15) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
dated July 11, 2006. |
|
(16) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form S-8
registration statement dated January 5, 2007. |
|
(17) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
dated June 26, 2007. |
|
(18) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Proxy
Statement dated July 25, 2007. |
|
(19) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated December 4, 2007. |
|
(20) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated March 5, 2008. |
|
(21) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form S-8
registration statement dated February 25, 2008. |
|
(22) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
dated June 24, 2008. |
|
(23) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Proxy
Statement dated July 14, 2008. |
|
(24) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated September 3, 2008. |
|
(25) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form S-8
registration statement dated October 30, 2008. |
|
(26) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated June 10, 2008. |
|
(27) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
dated March 2, 2009. |
|
(28) |
|
Previously filed as Appendix A to the Registration
Statement on
Form S-4
filed with the SEC on June 4, 2009. |
|
(29) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
filed with the SEC on June 4, 2009. |
|
(30) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
S-8
registration statement dated July 13, 2000. |
|
(31) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
S-8
registration statement dated January 16, 2001. |
|
* |
|
Identifies management plan or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
|
|
|
The schedules and other attachments to this exhibit have been
omitted. The Company agrees to furnish a copy of any omitted
schedules or attachments to the SEC upon request. |
TRADEMARKS
©2009
NetApp. All rights reserved. Specifications are subject to
change without notice. NetApp, the NetApp logo, the Network
Appliance logo, Go further, faster, DataFabric, Data ONTAP,
Decru, FAServer, FilerView, FlexCache, FlexClone, FlexShare,
FlexVol, MultiStore, NearStore, NetCache, SANscreen,
SecureShare, SnapDrive, SnapLock, SnapManager, SnapMirror,
SnapRestore, Snapshot, SnapVault, StoreVault, SyncMirror, Topio,
and WAFL are trademarks or registered trademarks of NetApp, Inc.
in the United States
and/or other
countries. Symantec and Netbackup are trademarks of Symantec
Corporation or its affiliates in the U.S. and other
countries. Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft
Corporation. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group. All other
brands or products are trademarks or registered trademarks of
their respective holders and should be treated as such.
exv3w2
Exhibit 3.2
CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
TO THE BYLAWS OF
NETAPP, INC.
The undersigned, Andrew Kryder, hereby certifies that he is the duly appointed, qualified, and
acting Secretary, General Counsel, and Senior Vice President, Legal and Tax of NetApp, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), and that on April 1, 2009, pursuant to Article III, Section 1
of the Bylaws of the Company, the Board of Directors (the Board) of the Company amended such Bylaws as set forth below:
Decrease in the Number of Directors
WHEREAS, the Board deems it advisable and in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders
to decrease the number of authorized directors on the Board from eleven (11) to ten (10); and
WHEREAS, Article III, Section 1 of the Bylaws of the Company states, in relevant part:
The number of directors of this corporation that shall constitute the whole Board shall be
determined by resolution of the Board of Directors; provided, however, that no decrease in
the number of directors shall have the effect of shortening the term of an incumbent
director.
RESOLVED: That the number of authorized directors on the Board be, and hereby is, decreased from
eleven (11) to ten (10).
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand this 1st day of April, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Andrew Kryder
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
|
|
Andrew Kryder
Secretary, General Counsel, and Senior Vice President, Legal and Tax |
|
exv10w57
Exhibit 10.57
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND,
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
NetApp, Inc.
7301 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Attention: Ingemar Lanevi
AGREEMENT CONCERNING
GROUND LEASE (FOR BUILDING 8)
THIS AGREEMENT CONCERNING GROUND LEASE (this Agreement) dated as of April 1, 2009 (the
Effective Date), is made by and between BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION (BNPPLC), a Delaware
corporation, and NETAPP, INC. (NAI), a Delaware corporation, which is the successor by merger to
Network Appliance, Inc.
RECITALS
This Agreement is entered into upon, and with respect to, the following facts and intentions:
A. BNPPLC and NAIs predecessor-in-interest, Network Appliance, Inc., have heretofore entered
into the following agreements:
(1) Amended and Restated Ground Lease (Building 8) dated as of November 29, 2007 (as
the same may have been modified, the Ground Lease), which was not recorded, but was
referenced in the two recorded short form documents described in the next two subparagraphs.
Pursuant to the Ground Lease, NAI, as ground lessor, ground leased to BNPPLC, as ground
lessee, that certain land more particularly described in Annex A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference (herein the Land).
(2) Amended and Restated Lease Agreement (Building 8) dated as of November 29, 2007 (as
the same may have been modified, the Sublease), which was the subject of that certain
Short Form of Amended and Restated Lease Agreement dated as of November 29, 2007 (the Short
Form of Sublease) recorded in the official records of Santa Clara County, California (the
Official Records) on November 5, 2008 under the county recorders Document #: 20037776.
Under the Sublease, BNPPLC, as sublessor, leased to NAI, as sublessee, BNPPLCs ground
leasehold interest in the Land and all of the improvements located thereon (collectively the
Subleased Premises).
(3) Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement (Building 8) dated as of November 29, 2007
(as the same may have been modified, the Purchase Agreement),
which was the subject of that certain Memorandum of Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement dated as of November 29,
2007, recorded in the Official Records on November 5, 2008 under the county recorders
Document #: 20037777.
(4) Amended and Restated Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement (Building 8) dated
as of November 29, 2007 (as the same may have been modified, the Common Definitions and
Provisions Agreement), which was not recorded, but was incorporated by reference into the
documents listed above. As used in this Agreement, capitalized terms defined in the Common
Definitions and Provisions Agreement and not otherwise defined in this Agreement are
intended to have the respective meanings assigned to them in the Common Definitions and
Provisions Agreement.
B. BNPPLC and NAI now mutually wish to terminate the Ground Lease on the terms and conditions
more particularly herein set forth.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the adequacy of which is hereby acknowledges,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Termination of Ground Lease. As of the Effective Date, BNPPLC hereby surrenders
all of its right title and interest in the Ground Lease unto NAI, subject only to the Permitted
Encumbrances described in Annex B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, and the Ground Lease is hereby terminated. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in
this Agreement, BNPPLC does, for itself and its successors, covenant, warrant and agree to defend
the title to the Land against claims and demands of any person claiming under or through a Lien
Removable by BNPPLC. Except as expressly set forth in the preceding sentence, BNPPLC makes no
warranty of title, express or implied, concerning the Land.
2. Acknowledgment of Reversion. BNPPLC also acknowledges and agrees that because of
the termination of the Ground Lease, all of BNPPLCs right, title and interest in and to the
following property will revert to NAI and BNPPLC does hereby forever relinquish, waive, and
quitclaim unto NAI (subject to such Permitted Encumbrances):
|
A. |
|
the Sublease; |
|
|
B. |
|
the Purchase Agreement; |
|
|
C. |
|
any pending or future award made because of our condemnation affecting the
Property or because of any conveyance to be made in lieu thereof, and any unpaid
proceeds of insurance or claim or cause of action for damages, loss or injury to the
Subleased Premises; and |
|
|
D. |
|
all other property included within the definition of Property as set forth in the |
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Page 2
|
|
|
Purchase Agreement, including the Subleased Premises; |
provided, however, that excluded from this provision and quitclaim, and reserved to BNPPLC, are any
rights or privileges of BNPPLC under the following are expressly reserved and retained by BNPPLC:
(I) the indemnities set forth in the Sublease and the Ground Lease, whether such rights are
presently known or unknown, including rights of BNPPLC to be indemnified against environmental
claims of third parties, as provided in the Ground Lease which may not presently be known; and (ii)
provision in the Sublease that establish the right of BNPPLC to recover any accrued unpaid rent
under the Sublease which may be outstanding as of the date hereof; and (iii) agreements between
BNPPLC and BNPPLCs Parent or any Participant, or any modification or extension thereof.
BNPPLC agrees to warrant and defend the title to the Subleased Premises as herein relinquished,
against claims and demands of any person claiming under or through a Lien Removable by BNPPLC
relating to the Subleased Premises. Except as expressly set forth in the preceding sentence, BNPPLC
makes no warranty of title, express or implied, concerning the Subleased Premises or any other
property referenced or described in this Section 2.
3. As Is Reversion. Notwithstanding any contrary provisions contained herein, NAI
acknowledges that BNPPLC makes no representations or warranties of any nature or kind, whether
statutory, express or implied, with respect to environmental matters or the physical condition of
the Subleased Premises, and NAI, by acceptance of this agreement, accepts the Subleased Premises
As Is, Where Is, and With All Faults, and without any such representation or warranty by
BNPPLC as to environmental matters, the physical condition of the Subleased Premises, compliance
with subdivision or platting requirements or construction of any improvements. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, NAI hereby further acknowledges and agrees that warranties of
merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are excluded from the transactions
contemplated by this Agreement, as are any warranties arising from a course of dealing or usage of
trade. NAI hereby assumes all risk and liability (and agrees that BNPPLC will not be liability for
any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or other damages) resulting or arising from or
relating to the ownership, use, condition, location, maintenance, repair, or operation of the
Subleased Premises, except for damages proximately caused by (and attributed by any applicable
principles of comparative fault to) any Established Misconduct (as defined in the Common
Definitions and Provisions Agreement) of BNPPLC.
4. Binding Effect. The terms, provisions, covenants, and conditions hereof will be
binding upon NAI and BNPPLC and their respective successors and assigns, and any other party
claiming through either of them, and will inure to the benefit of NAI and BNPPLC and all
transferees, mortgages, successors and assigns.
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Page 3
5. Miscellaneous. This Agreement and any other agreement relating hereto and executed
concurrently herewith represent the entire agreement of the parties hereto with respect to the
subject matter hereof and supersede any prior negotiations and agreement between BNPPLC and NAI
concerning the subject matter hereof. No amendment or modification of this Agreement will be
binding or valid unless express in a writing executed by both parties hereto. This Agreement will
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard
to conflict or choice of laws. Words in the singular number will be held to include the plural and
vice versa, unless the context otherwise requires. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts,
each of which will be an original and all of which together will be a single instrument.
[Signature pages follow.]
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Page 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, BNPPLC and NAI have signed this Agreement Concerning Ground Lease as of the
date(s) of their respective acknowledgments before notaries indicated below, but to be effective as
of April 1, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Lloyd G. Cox |
|
|
|
Title: |
Managing Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATE OF DALLAS
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
) |
|
|
SS |
COUNTY OF TEXAS
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
|
|
|
, 2009, before me, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
date
|
|
|
Name and Title of Officer (eg., Jane Doe, Notary Public) |
Personally appeared Lloyd G. Cox, Managing Director of BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation, a
Delaware corporation
Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in
his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under Penalty of Perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature of Notary Public
|
|
|
|
Place Notary Seal Above |
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Signature Page
[Continuation of signature pages to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease dated to be effective as of
April 1, 2009.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
NETAPP, INC., a Delaware corporation, which is the
successor in interest by merger to Network Appliance,
Inc.
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Ingemar Lanevi |
|
|
|
Title: |
Vice President and Corporate Treasurer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
) |
|
|
SS |
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On
|
|
|
, 2009, before me, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
date
|
|
|
Name and Title of Officer (eg., Jane Doe, Notary Public) |
Personally appeared Ingemar Lanevi, Vice President and Corporate Treasurer of NetApp, Inc., a
Delaware corporation
Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in
his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under Penalty of Perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature of Notary Public
|
|
|
|
Place Notary Seal Above |
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Signature Page
Annex A
Legal Description
Proposed Parcel 8, and (except to the extent within a different platted Parcel as currently shown
in the Map Records of the County of Santa Clara, California) proposed Parcel 12, and the Additional
Leased Premises as defined below, (collectively, the Building 8 Ground Lease Premises) as shown
on that certain Vesting Tentative Parcel Map provided to BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation (BNPPLC)
by Network Appliance, Inc. (NAI) attached hereto and made a part hereof (the Tentative Map),
which has received preliminary approval from the City of Sunnyvale, California, but not yet been
filed for record in the office of the recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of California.
As used herein, Additional Leased Premises means the parking lots, driveways and other areas
shaded in gray on the Tentative Map attached hereto within the larger area designated as Common Lot
A (consisting of 30.46 Acres, more or less) on the Tentative Map. The southern boundary of the
Additional Leased Premises is a line that runs North 75 degrees, 07 minutes, 58 seconds equidistant
from the southern boundary of Parcel 8 and the northern boundary of Parcel 7, both as shown on the
Tentative Map. The eastern boundary of the Additional Leased Premises runs along the same line as
the eastern boundary of Common Lot A, as shown on the Tentative Map. The western boundary of the
Additional Leased Premises runs along the same line as the western boundary of Parcel 8 and Parcel
7, as shown on the Tentative Map. The northern boundary of the Additional Leased Premises runs
along the center of an existing or proposed driveway which is situated between Parcel 8 and Parcel
9, as shown on the Tentative Map.
TOGETHER WITH, easements appurtenant to the Building 8 Ground Lease Premises as described in
Exhibit A attached to the Ground Lease.
Annex A to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Page 2
Annex B
Permitted Encumbrances
This agreement is made subject to all encumbrances not constituting a Lien Removable by BNPPLC
(as defined in the Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement), including the following matters to
the extent the same are still valid and in force:
1. Taxes and assessments for the current tax year and subsequent years, which are not yet due and
payable.
2. THE LIEN of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to Chapter 3.5 commencing with Section
75 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, resulting from changes of ownership or completion
of construction on or after the date hereof.
3. EASEMENT for the purposes stated herein and incidents thereto
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purpose
|
|
: Slope Easement |
|
|
In favor of
|
|
: City of Sunnyvale |
|
|
Recorded
|
|
: October 9, 1964 in Book 6695, page 430, Official Records |
|
|
Affects
|
|
: Easterly 18 feet, as shown on a survey plat entitled ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey
for: Network Appliance, 1345
Crossman Avenue, dated December 2, 1999, prepared by Kier
& Wright, Job No. 97208-16. |
4. EASEMENT for the purposes stated herein and incidents thereto
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purpose
|
|
: Public utilities easement |
|
|
In favor of
|
|
: City of Sunnyvale |
|
|
Recorded
|
|
: October 9, 1964 in Book 6695, page 450, Official Records |
|
|
Affects
|
|
: Easterly 7 feet, as shown on a survey plat entitled ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey
for: Network Appliance, 1345 Crossman Avenue, dated December 2, 1999, prepared by Kier
& Wright, Job No. 97208-16. |
5. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions in the Declaration of Protective Covenants Moffett
Industrial Park No. 2) recorded December 23, 1971 in Book 9640, page 443, Official Records; which
provide that a violation thereof shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any Mortgage or
Deed of Trust made in good faith and for value. Said Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions do not
provide for reversion of title in the event of a breach thereof. Restrictions, if any, based upon
race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin are deleted, unless and
only to the extent that said covenant (a) is exempt under Chapter 42, Section 3607, of the United
States Code, or (b) related to handicap but does not discriminate against handicapped persons.
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION of the rights, powers, duties, obligations, and reservations of
Moffett Park Associates, in favor of The Prudential Insurance Company of America, recorded February
8, 1977 in Book C583, page 685, Official Records.
6. EASEMENT for the purposes stated herein and incidents thereto
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purpose
|
|
: Public utilities |
|
|
Granted to
|
|
: City of Sunnyvale |
|
|
Recorded
|
|
: November 16, 1976 in Book C414, page 105, Official Records |
|
|
Affects
|
|
: Southerly 10 feet, as shown on a survey plat entitled ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey
for: Network Appliance, 1345
Crossman Avenue, dated December 2, 1999, prepared by Kier
& Wright, Job No. 97208-16. |
7. LIMITATIONS, covenants, restrictions, reservations, exceptions or terms, but deleting any
covenant, condition or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on
race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin to the extent such
covenants, conditions or restrictions violate 42 USC 3604(c), contained in the document recorded
February 5, 1980 in Book F122, page 460, Official Records.
Annex B to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (Building 8) Page 2
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FOREIGN STATUS
Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that a transferee of a U.S. real property
interest must withhold tax if the transferor is a foreign person. Sections 18805, 18815 and 26131
of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, as amended, provide that a transferee of a California
real property interest must withhold income tax if the transferor is a nonresident seller.
To inform NETAPP, INC. (Transferee), a Delaware corporation, that withholding of tax is not
required upon the disposition of a U.S. real property interest by BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION
(Transferor), a Delaware corporation, the undersigned hereby certifies the following on behalf of
Transferor:
1 Transferor is not a foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust, or foreign estate
(as those terms are defined in the Internal Revenue Code and Income Tax Regulations);
2 Transferor is not a disregarded entity (as defined in Section 1.1445-2(b)(2)(iii) of the Income
Tax Regulations);
3 Transferors U.S. employer identification number is 75-2252918; and
4 Transferors office address is:
BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation
100 Crescent Court, Suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Attention: Lloyd G. Cox, Managing Director
Telecopy: (972) 788-9140
Transferor understands that this Certification of Non-Foreign Status may be disclosed to the
Internal Revenue Service by Transferee and that any false statement contained herein could be
punished by fine, imprisonment, or both.
Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have examined this Certification of Non-Foreign Status
and to the best of my knowledge and belief it is true, correct and complete, and I further
declare that I have authority to sign this document on behalf of the Transferor.
Dated as of: April 1, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lloyd G. Cox, acting as Managing Director of
Transferor |
exv10w58
Exhibit 10.58
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND,
WHEN RECORDED, RETURN TO:
NetApp, Inc.
7301 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
Attention: Ingemar Lanevi
AGREEMENT CONCERNING
GROUND LEASE (FOR RTP DATA CENTER)
THIS AGREEMENT CONCERNING GROUND LEASE (this Agreement) dated as of April 1, 2009 (the
Effective Date), is made by and between BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION (BNPPLC), a Delaware
corporation, and NETAPP, INC. (NAI), a Delaware corporation, which is the successor by merger to
Network Appliance, Inc.
RECITALS
This Agreement is entered into upon, and with respect to, the following facts and intentions:
A. BNPPLC and NAIs predecessor-in-interest, Network Appliance, Inc., have heretofore entered
into the following agreements:
(1) Amended and Restated Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) dated as of November 29, 2007
(as the same may have been modified, the Ground Lease), which (A) was referenced in the
two recorded short form documents described in the next two subparagraphs, and (B) was an
amendment and restatement of the Ground Lease dated as of July 17, 2007 recorded in Book
012665, page 00268 of the Wake County, North Carolina Registry. Pursuant to the Ground
Lease, NAI, as ground lessor, ground leased to BNPPLC, as ground lessee, that certain land
more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference (herein the Land).
(2) Amended and Restated Lease Agreement (RTP Data Center) dated as of November 29,
2007 (as the same may have been modified, the Sublease), which was the subject of that
certain Short Form of Amended and Restated Lease Agreement dated as of November 29, 2007
(the Short Form of Sublease) recorded in Book 013007, page 01436 of the Wake County, North
Carolina Registry. Under the Sublease, BNPPLC, as sublessor, leased to NAI, as sublessee,
BNPPLCs ground leasehold interest in the Land and all of the improvements located thereon
(collectively the Subleased Premises).
(3) Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement (RTP Data Center) dated
as of November 29, 2007 (as the same may have been modified, the Purchase Agreement),
which was the subject of that certain Memorandum of Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement
dated as of November 29, 2007, recorded in Book 013007, page 01454 of the Wake County, North
Carolina Registry.
(4) Amended and Restated Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement (RTP Data Center)
dated as of November 29, 2007 (as the same may have been modified, the Common Definitions
and Provisions Agreement), which was not recorded, but was incorporated by reference into
the documents listed above. As used in this Agreement, capitalized terms defined in the
Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement and not otherwise defined in this Agreement are
intended to have the respective meanings assigned to them in the Common Definitions and
Provisions Agreement.
B. BNPPLC and NAI now mutually wish to terminate the Ground Lease on the terms and conditions
more particularly herein set forth.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the adequacy of which is hereby acknowledges,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Termination of Ground Lease. As of the Effective Date, BNPPLC hereby surrenders
all of its right title and interest in the Ground Lease unto NAI, subject only to the Permitted
Encumbrances described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, and the Ground Lease is hereby terminated. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in
this Agreement, BNPPLC does, for itself and its successors, covenant, warrant and agree to defend
the title to the Land against claims and demands of any person claiming under or through a Lien
Removable by BNPPLC. Except as expressly set forth in the preceding sentence, BNPPLC makes no
warranty of title, express or implied, concerning the Land.
2. Acknowledgment of Reversion. BNPPLC also acknowledges and agrees that because of
the termination of the Ground Lease, all of BNPPLCs right, title and interest in and to the
following property will revert to NAI and BNPPLC does hereby forever relinquish, waive, and
quitclaim unto NAI (subject to such Permitted Encumbrances):
|
A. |
|
the Sublease; |
|
|
B. |
|
the Purchase Agreement; |
|
|
C. |
|
any pending or future award made because of our condemnation affecting the
Property or because of any conveyance to be made in lieu thereof, and any unpaid
proceeds of insurance or claim or cause of action for damages, loss or injury to the Subleased Premises; and |
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 2
|
D. |
|
all other property included within the definition of Property as set forth in
the Purchase Agreement, including the Subleased Premises; |
provided, however, that excluded from this provision and quitclaim, and reserved to BNPPLC, are any
rights or privileges of BNPPLC under the following are expressly reserved and retained by BNPPLC:
(I) the indemnities set forth in the Sublease and the Ground Lease, whether such rights are
presently known or unknown, including rights of BNPPLC to be indemnified against environmental
claims of third parties, as provided in the Ground Lease which may not presently be known; and (ii)
provision in the Sublease that establish the right of BNPPLC to recover any accrued unpaid rent
under the Sublease which may be outstanding as of the date hereof; and (iii) agreements between
BNPPLC and BNPPLCs Parent or any Participant, or any modification or extension thereof.
BNPPLC agrees to warrant and defend the title to the Subleased Premises as herein relinquished,
against claims and demands of any person claiming under or through a Lien Removable by BNPPLC
relating to the Subleased Premises. Except as expressly set forth in the preceding sentence, BNPPLC
makes no warranty of title, express or implied, concerning the Subleased Premises or any other
property referenced or described in this Section 2.
3. As Is Reversion. Notwithstanding any contrary provisions contained herein, NAI
acknowledges that BNPPLC makes no representations or warranties of any nature or kind, whether
statutory, express or implied, with respect to environmental matters or the physical condition of
the Subleased Premises, and NAI, by acceptance of this agreement, accepts the Subleased Premises
As Is, Where Is, and With All Faults, and without any such representation or warranty by
BNPPLC as to environmental matters, the physical condition of the Subleased Premises, compliance
with subdivision or platting requirements or construction of any improvements. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, NAI hereby further acknowledges and agrees that warranties of
merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are excluded from the transactions
contemplated by this Agreement, as are any warranties arising from a course of dealing or usage of
trade. NAI hereby assumes all risk and liability (and agrees that BNPPLC will not be liability for
any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or other damages) resulting or arising from or
relating to the ownership, use, condition, location, maintenance, repair, or operation of the
Subleased Premises, except for damages proximately caused by (and attributed by any applicable
principles of comparative fault to) any Established Misconduct (as defined in the Common
Definitions and Provisions Agreement) of BNPPLC.
4. Binding Effect. The terms, provisions, covenants, and conditions hereof will be
binding upon NAI and BNPPLC and their respective successors and assigns, and any other party
claiming through either of them, and will inure to the benefit of NAI and BNPPLC and all
transferees, mortgages, successors and assigns.
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 3
5. Miscellaneous. This Agreement and any other agreement relating hereto and executed
concurrently herewith represent the entire agreement of the parties hereto with respect to the
subject matter hereof and supersede any prior negotiations and agreement between BNPPLC and NAI
concerning the subject matter hereof. No amendment or modification of this Agreement will be
binding or valid unless express in a writing executed by both parties hereto. This Agreement will
be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of North Carolina without
regard to conflict or choice of laws. Words in the singular number will be held to include the
plural and vice versa, unless the context otherwise requires. This Agreement may be executed in
counterparts, each of which will be an original and all of which together will be a single
instrument.
[Signature pages follow.]
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, BNPPLC and NAI have signed this Agreement Concerning Ground Lease as of the
date(s) of their respective acknowledgments before notaries indicated below, but to be effective as
of April 1, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Lloyd G. Cox |
|
|
|
Title: |
Managing Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATE OF DALLAS
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
) |
|
|
SS |
COUNTY OF TEXAS
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
I, , certify that Lloyd G. Cox personally came before me this day and
acknowledged that he is Managing Director of BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation, a Delaware
corporation, and that he, as a Managing Director being duly authorized to do so, executed the
foregoing on behalf of the corporation.
Witness my hand and official seal this the day of March, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notary Public, State of Texas
|
|
|
My Commission Expires:
(Notary Seal)
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Signature Page
[Continuation of signature pages to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease dated to be effective as of
April 1, 2009.]
|
|
|
|
|
|
NETAPP, INC., a Delaware corporation, which is the
successor in interest by merger to Network Appliance,
Inc.
|
|
|
By: |
|
|
|
|
Name: |
Ingemar Lanevi |
|
|
|
Title: |
Vice President and Corporate Treasurer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
) |
|
|
SS |
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
|
|
|
) |
|
|
|
I, , certify that Ingemar Lanevi personally came before me this day
and acknowledged that he is Vice President and Corporate Treasurer of NetApp, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, and that he, as a Vice President and Corporate Treasurer being duly authorized to do
so, executed the foregoing on behalf of the corporation.
Witness my hand and official seal this the ___day of March, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notary Public, State of California
|
|
|
My Commission Expires:
(Notary Seal)
Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Signature Page
Exhibit A
Legal Description
BEING a portion of Site 12 as shown on the map entitled Exempt Subdivision Map of Site 12,
prepared by Barbara H. Mulkey Engineering, Inc., on May 30, 2000 as recorded in the Book of Maps
2000, Page 1300, Wake County, North Carolina Registry, such portion being described as follows:
Unit 4 and the Additional Leased Premises, both as defined below (collectively, the Ground
Lease Premises).
As used in this Exhibit:
(1) Additional Leased Premises means the land surrounding and adjacent to Unit 4, depicted
on the site plan attached to and made a part of this Exhibit as the area shaded in gray,
which includes parking lots, driveways and other areas within the larger area designated as
Common Elements in the Condominium Declaration. The outer boundaries of the Additional
Leased Premises are described by metes and bounds on the last page attached to and made a
part of this Exhibit. All land within those outer boundaries, other than Unit 4, is
included in the Additional Leased Premises.
(2) Condominium Declaration means the Declaration of Condominium for NetApp RTP Phase I
Condominium recorded in Book 012647, Page 01310, Wake County, North Carolina Registry.
(3) Condominium Map means the plat provided to BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation (BNPPLC)
by Network Appliance, Inc. (NAI) attached to and made a part of this Exhibit. (The
Condominium Map has also been filed in the Book of Maps CM2007, Page 444A1, Wake County,
North Carolina Registry.)
(4) Unit 4 means the land designated and described in the Condominium Declaration as Unit
4 and is shown on the Condominium Map and site plan attached to and made a part of this
Exhibit.
TOGETHER WITH, easements appurtenant to the Amended and Restated Ground Lease Premises as described
in Exhibit A attached to the Ground Lease dated as of November 29, 2007 between BNPPLC, as lessee,
and NAI, as lessor (the Ground Lease);
SUBJECT, HOWEVER, to an easement reserved over the Additional Leased Premises (but not any part of
Unit 4) in favor of the Association as described in Exhibit A attached to the Ground Lease.
Exhibit A to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 2
Exhibit A to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 3
Attachment to Exhibit A Metes and Bounds
Description of Additional Leased Premises
The following is a metes and bounds description of the outer boundaries of the Additional Leased
Premise:
BEGINNING
at NCGS Monument Hopson, said monument having NC Grid Coordinates of N=773,721.48
and E=2,034,907.39 (NAD 83), traveling thence South 11° 44 59 West 6154.66 feet to a right-of-way
monument on the southern margin of Louis Stephens Drive (a 100 foot public- right-of-way), thence
North 72° 48 35 East 164.29 feet to a right-of-way monument on the southern margin of Kit Creek
Road (a 150 foot public right-of-way); thence with the southern margin of said Kit Creek Road the
following two (2) courses and distances:
(1) South
68° 46 54 East 4l2.64 feet to a right-of-way monument, and
(2) with
a curve to the right having a radius of 924.83 feet, an arc length of 475.96, and
a chord bearing
and distance of South 54° 02 59
East 470.72 feet to a computed point;
said computed being the POINT AND PLACE OF BEGINNING:
thence from said point of beginning and continuing with the
southern margin of Kit Creek Road South 39° 18 29
East 571.64 feet to a computed point, thence cornering and leaving said right-of-way and with the
common line of property now or formerly owned by Research Triangle Foundation of NC (DB 1670 PG
239) the following two (2) courses and distances:
(1) South 50° 41 31 West 100.00 feet to an iron pipe found; and
(2) South 83° 31 01 West 483.47 feet to an iron pipe found;
thence cornering and along three (3) new lines within the bounds of property owned by Network
Appliance, Inc. (DB 10941 Pg 2054) as follows:
(1) North 12° 44 00 West 279.97 feet;
(2) North 48° 55 31 West 50.30 feet; and
(3) North
32°
57 24 East 401.61 feet to a point along the southern margin of said Kit Creek
Road;
thence with the southern margin of Kit Creek Road along a curve to the right having a radius
of 925.04
feet, an arc length of 113.05 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 42° 48 33 East
112.98 feet to
the POINT AND PLACE OF BEGINNING, containing 5.36 acres (233,621
square feet), more or less,
said area shown on the rendering attached hereto.
Exhibit A
to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 4
Exhibit B
Permitted Encumbrances
This agreement is made subject to all encumbrances not constituting a Lien Removable by BNPPLC
(as defined in the Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement), including the following matters to
the extent the same are still valid and in force:
This conveyance is subject to all encumbrances not constituting a Lien Removable by BNPPLC (as
defined in the Amended and Restated Common Definitions and Provisions Agreement), including the
following matters to the extent the same are still valid and in force:
1. |
|
Taxes for the year 2007 and subsequent years, not yet due and payable. |
|
2. |
|
Amended Declaration of Covenants recorded in Book 1663, page 559, Wake County Registry and
Amended Conditions, Covenants, Restrictions and Reservations recorded in Book 3679, page 53,
Wake County Registry as further amended and modified by instrument recorded in Book 3679, page
41, Wake County Registry; instrument recorded in Book 3679, page 48, Wake County Registry; and
instrument recorded in Book 3679, page 53, Wake County Registry. The aforesaid covenants were
extended by Extension Agreement recorded in Book 6098, page 683, Wake County Registry. |
|
3. |
|
Easement(s) to Duke Power Company recorded in Book 1306, page 330; Book 1262, page 51; Book
1262, page 186; Book 1306, page 334; Book 1389, page 570; and Book 1389, page 568, Wake County
Registry. |
|
4. |
|
Sanitary Sewer Easement recorded in Book 4783, page 360, Wake County Registry; and shown in
Map Book 1990, pages 973-976, Wake County Registry. |
|
5. |
|
Easement to Duke Power Company as shown in Plat Book 1985, page 1208 and Plat Book 1985,
1347, Wake County Registry. |
Exhibit A to Agreement Concerning Ground Lease (RTP Data Center) Page 5
6. |
|
The following maters as shown on plat prepared by Barbara H. Mulkey Engineering, Inc.,
dated May 30, 2000 entitled Exempt Subdivision Map of Site 12, recorded in Book of Maps
2000, page 1300, Wake County Registry: |
|
(a) |
|
New permanent drainage easement along the eastern right of way identified on
such plat as Future Roadway for Louis Stephens Drive; |
|
|
(b) |
|
Surface Cover Maintenance easement along the western boundary of Site 12 as
shown on such plat; |
|
|
(c) |
|
One hundred (100) year flood zone along the southern boundary of Site 12 as
shown on such plat; |
|
|
(d) |
|
Temporary drainage easement along norther boundary of Site 12 as shown on such
plat; |
|
|
(e) |
|
Existing sixty (60) foot right of way of Kit Creek Road, which right of way is
to be abandoned (if it has not already been abandoned) as located in the northeastern
portion of Site 12 as shown on such plat; |
|
|
(f) |
|
Overhead electric lines located on the northeastern portion of Site 12 as shown
on such plat; |
|
|
(g) |
|
Flood plain area, wetlands and creek located within the Natural Area Preserve
as shown on such plat; and |
|
|
(h) |
|
Thirty (30) foot Wake County sanitary sewer easement within the Natural Areas
Preserve as shown on such plat. |
7. Except to the extent inconsistent with or in conflict with the requirements, limitations and
qualifications of subparagraphs 11(K), 11(L) and 11(M) of the Ground Lease, the terms and
conditions of the Condominium Declaration. |
CERTIFICATION OF NON-FOREIGN STATUS
Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code provides that a transferee of a U.S. real property
interest must withhold tax if the transferor is a foreign person. To inform NETAPP, INC.
(Transferee), a Delaware corporation, that withholding of tax is not required upon the
disposition of a U.S. real property interest by BNP PARIBAS LEASING CORPORATION (Transferor), a
Delaware corporation, the undersigned hereby certifies the following on behalf of Transferor:
1 Transferor is not a foreign corporation, foreign partnership, foreign trust, or foreign estate
(as those terms are defined in the Internal Revenue Code and Income Tax Regulations);
2 Transferor is not a disregarded entity (as defined in Section 1.1445-2(b)(2)(iii) of the Income
Tax Regulations);
3 Transferors U.S. employer identification number is 75-2252918; and
4 Transferors office address is:
BNP Paribas Leasing Corporation
100 Crescent Court, Suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75201
Attention: Lloyd G. Cox, Managing Director
Telecopy: (972) 788-9140
Transferor understands that this Certification of Non-Foreign Status may be disclosed to the
Internal Revenue Service by Transferee and that any false statement contained herein could be
punished by fine, imprisonment, or both.
Under penalties of perjury I declare that I have examined this Certification of Non-Foreign Status
and to the best of my knowledge and belief it is true, correct and complete, and I further
declare that I have authority to sign this document on behalf of the Transferor.
Dated as of: April 1, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lloyd G. Cox, acting as Managing Director of
Transferor
|
|
|
exv10w59
Exhibit 10.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
www.netapp.com |
|
919 476 5750 Tel |
|
7301 Kit Creek Road |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research Triangle Park, NC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
27709 |
NOTICE OF TERMINATION
April 23, 2009
J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, as Agent to the Credit Agreement referred to below
Attention: Bank Loan Syndications Department
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The undersigned, NetApp, Inc., refers to the Secured Credit Agreement, dated as of October 5, 2007
(as amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the Credit
Agreement, the terms defined therein being used herein as therein defined), among the
undersigned, certain Lenders parties thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Agent, and hereby gives
you notice, irrevocably, pursuant to Section 2.09 of the Credit Agreement that the undersigned
hereby requests a termination of the Credit Agreement effective as of April 24, 2009.
Very truly yours,
NetApp, Inc.
By /s/
Ingemar Lanevi
Title: Vice President & Corporate Treasurer
Legal Reference
exv10w68
Exhibit 10.68
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
I. PARTIES
This Settlement Agreement (Agreement) is entered into among the United States of America,
acting through the United States Department of Justice and on behalf of the General Services
Administration (hereafter GSA) (collectively the United States), NetApp, Inc. (formerly known
as Network Appliance, Inc.) and NetApp U.S. Public Sector, Inc. (formerly known as Network
Appliance Federal Systems, Inc.) (hereafter collectively NetApp), and Igor Kapuscinski
(hereafter referred to as the Parties), through their authorized representatives.
II. PREAMBLE
As a preamble to this Agreement, the Parties agree to the following:
A. NetApp is a company headquartered in Sunnyvale, California that manufactures, sells and
distributes enterprise network storage and data management solutions, including hardware, software
and storage management services for open network environments.
B. Kapuscinski (Relator) is an individual resident of Maryland. On April 13, 2006, Relator
filed a qui tam action in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia captioned United States ex rel. Kapuscinski v. Network Appliance, Inc. and Network
Appliance Federal Systems, Inc., Civ. No. 06-00675 (RMU) (hereafter the Civil Action).
Relator was formerly employed at NetApp in the positions of Systems Engineer, Manager of
Administration and Procurement, and Federal Operations Manager/Director. The United States will
intervene in the Civil Action promptly upon the
execution of this Settlement Agreement.
C. The United States contends that it has certain civil claims, as specified in Paragraph 2,
below; against NetApp for engaging in the following conduct during the period
from
August 1, 1997
to February 12, 2005: In connection with Contracts GS-35F-0176D and GS-35F-5183H (the Contracts),
NetApp: 1) made false disclosures and false statements to GSA as to the discounts it was providing
to its other customers and as to its compliance with the Contracts price reduction clause; 2)
violated the price reduction terms of the Contracts by failing to extend proper discounts to
government customers purchasing under the Contracts; and 3) as a consequence, presented and/or
caused others to present claims to the United States under the Contracts that were inflated because
they were not discounted as highly as they should have been. For purposes of this Agreement, the
conduct described above is known as the Covered Conduct.
D. Net App denies the contentions of the United States set forth in Paragraph C and the claims
and allegations made by the Relator in the Civil Action. This Agreement represents a compromise to
avoid continued litigation and associated risks and is neither an admission of liability by NetApp
nor a concession by the United States or Relator that their claims are not well founded.
E. To avoid the delay, uncertainty, inconvenience, and expense of protracted litigation of the
above claims, the Parties reach a full and final settlement pursuant to the Terms and Conditions
below.
III. TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. NetApp agrees to pay to the United States $128,000,000, plus interest accruing at the rate
of 3 percent per annum from February 18, 2009 until the date of
payment (the Settlement Amount). NetApp further agrees to pay Relator $75,000 for expenses
and attorneys fees and costs. The foregoing payments shall be made as follows:
-2-
a. NetApp agrees to pay the full Settlement Amount to the United States by electronic funds
transfer pursuant to written instructions to be provided by the United States Attorneys Office for
the District of Columbia. NetApp agrees to make this electronic funds transfer no later than April
27, 2009.
b. Contingent upon the United States receiving the Settlement Amount from NetApp and as soon
as feasible after receipt, the United States agrees to pay $19,200,000, plus 15% of the interest
paid by NetApp, to Relator by electronic funds transfer pursuant to written instructions to be
provided by H. Vincent McKnight.
c. NetApp agrees to pay $75,000 by electronic funds transfer pursuant to written instructions
to be provided by Vincent McKnight. NetApp agrees to make this electronic funds transfer no later
than April 27, 2009.
2. Subject to the exceptions in Paragraph 4 (concerning excluded claims), below, in
consideration of the obligations of NetApp in this Agreement, conditioned upon NetApps full
payment of the Settlement Amount, the United States (on behalf of itself, its officers, agents,
agencies, and departments) agrees to release NetApp together with its current and former parent
corporations; direct and indirect subsidiaries; brother or sister corporations; divisions;
shareholders; officers, directors, employees and affiliates; and the successors and assigns of any
of them from, any civil or administrative monetary claim the United States has or may have for the
Covered Conduct under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733; the Program Fraud Civil
Remedies Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801-3812; the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 601 et
seq. or the common law
theories of breach of contract, payment by mistake, unjust enrichment, and fraud.
-3-
3. Subject to the exceptions in Paragraph 4 (concerning excluded claims), below, in
consideration of the obligations of NetApp in this Agreement, conditioned upon
NetApps full payment of the Settlement Amount, Relator, for himself and for his heirs,
successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns, agrees to release NetApp from any civil monetary claim
the United States has or may have for the Covered Conduct under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§
3729-3733.
4. Notwithstanding any term of this Agreement, specifically reserved and excluded from the
scope and terms of this Agreement as to any entity or person (including NetApp and Relator) are the
following claims of the United States:
a. Any civil, criminal, or administrative liability arising under Title 26, U.S. Code
(Internal Revenue Code);
b. Any criminal liability;
c. Except as explicitly stated in this Agreement, any administrative liability including the
suspension and debarment rights of any federal agency;
d. Any liability to the United States (or its agencies) for any conduct other than the Covered
Conduct;
e. Any liability based upon such obligations as are created by this Agreement;
f. Any liability for express or implied warranty claims or other claims for defective or
deficient products or services, including quality of goods and services;
g. Any liability for failure to deliver goods or services due.
-4-
5. Relator and his heirs, successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns agree not to object to
this Agreement and agree and confirm that this Agreement is fair, adequate, and reasonable under
all the circumstances, pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(c)(2)(B) and, conditioned upon receipt of
Relators share, Relator, for himself individually, and for his heirs, successors, agents, and
assigns, fully and finally releases, waives, and forever discharges the United States, its
officers, agents, and employees, from any claims arising from or. relating to 31 U.S.C. § 3730;
from any claims arising from the filing of the Civil Action; and from any other claims for a share
of the Settlement Amount; and in full settlement of any claims Relator may have under this
Agreement. This Agreement does not resolve or in any manner affect any claims the United States has
or may have against the Relator arising under Title 26, U.S. Code (Internal Revenue Code), or any
claims arising under this Agreement.
6. In consideration of the obligations of NetApp in this Agreement, conditioned upon the full
payment of the Settlement Amount and Relators Legal Fees, Relator, for himself and for his heirs,
successors, attorneys, agents, and assigns, agrees to generally release, acquit, waive, and forever
discharge NetApp and all the current and former officers and directors, employees, agents,
attorneys, owners and shareholders of NetApp from any and all rights, claims, expenses, debts,
liabilities, demands, obligations, costs, damages, injuries, actions and causes of action of every
nature, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, in law or in equity from the beginning
of the world to the day of these presents including but not limited to those he advanced or could
have advanced in the Civil Action or otherwise under the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§
3729-3733, for expenses or attorneys fees and costs under 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h), or under 31
U.S.C. § 3730(h) for employment decisions by NetApp and/or
-5-
other statutory or common law doctrines
of payment by mistake, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, fraud, or the like. The foregoing
sentence is intended to be interpreted as a general release. Furthermore, Relator covenants not to
sue NetApp, its current and former officers and directors, employees, agents, attorneys and
shareholders of NetApp with respect to any and all rights, claims, expenses, debts, liabilities,
demands, obligations, costs, damages, injuries, actions and causes of action of every nature,
whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, in law or in equity, including those for
attorneys fees and costs arising prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement.
7. NetApp waives and shall not assert any defenses NetApp may have to any criminal prosecution
or administrative action relating to the Covered Conduct that may be based in whole or in part on a
contention that, under the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, or
under the Excessive Fines Clause in the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution, this Agreement bars a
remedy sought in such criminal prosecution or administrative action. Nothing in this paragraph or
any other provision of this Agreement constitutes an agreement by the United States concerning the
characterization of the Settlement Amount for purposes of the Internal Revenue laws, Title 26 of
the United States Code.
8. NetApp fully and finally releases the United States, its agencies, employees, servants, and
agents from any claims (including attorneys fees, costs, and expenses of every kind and however
denominated) that NetApp has asserted, could have asserted, or may assert in the future against the
United States, and its agencies,
employees, servants, and agents, related to the Covered Conduct and the United States
investigation and prosecution thereof.
-6-
9. Conditioned on the dismissal with prejudice of the Civil Action, NetApp hereby forever
releases and discharges Relator of and from any and all manner of action or actions, cause or
causes of action, in law or in equity, suits, debts, liens, contracts, agreements, promises,
liability, claims, demands, grievances, damages, losses, costs or expenses, of any nature
whatsoever, known or unknown, fixed or contingent, which Net App now has or may hereafter have
against the Relator by reason of any matter, cause, or thing whatsoever from the beginning of time
to the date of these presents arising out of, based upon, or relating to the relationship between
NetApp and Relator including but not limited to, any issues raised or that could have been raised
or relating in any way to the Civil Action.
10. NetApp agrees to the following:
a.
Unallowable Costs Defined: that all costs (as defined in the Federal Acquisition
Regulation, 48 C.F.R. § 31.205-47) incurred by or on behalf of NetApp, and its present or former
officers, directors, employees, shareholders, and agents in connection with:
(1) the matters covered by this Agreement;
(2) the United States audit(s) and civil investigation(s) of the matters covered by this
Agreement;
(3) NetApps investigation, defense, and corrective actions undertaken in response to the
United States audit(s) and civil investigation(s) in connection with the
matters covered by this Agreement (including attorneys fees);
(4) the negotiation and performance of this Agreement;
-7-
(5) the payment NetApp makes to the United States pursuant to this Agreement and any payments
that NetApp may make to Relator, including costs and attorneys fees, are Unallowable Costs for
government contracting purposes (hereinafter referred to as Unallowable Costs).
b. Future Treatment of Unallowable Costs: Unallowable Costs will be separately determined and
accounted for by NetApp, and NetApp shall not charge such Unallowable Costs directly or indirectly
to any contracts with the United States.
c. Treatment of Unallowable Costs Previously Submitted for Payment: NetApp further agrees that
within 90 days of the Effective Date of this Agreement it shall identify any unallowable costs (as
defined in this Paragraph) included in payments previously sought by NetApp or any of its
subsidiaries or affiliates from the United States. NetApp agrees that the United States, at a
minimum, shall be entitled to recoup from NetApp any overpayment plus applicable interest and
penalties as a result of the inclusion of such Unallowable Costs in any such payments. Any payments
due shall be paid to the United States pursuant to the direction of the Department of Justice
and/or the affected agencies. The United States reserves its rights to disagree with any
calculations submitted by NetApp or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates regarding any Unallowable
Costs included in payments previously sought by NetApp, or the effect of any such Unallowable Costs
on the amount of such payments.
d. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of the rights of the
United States to audit, examine, or re-examine NetApps books and records to determine that no
Unallowable Costs have been claimed in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph.
-8-
11. This Agreement is intended to be for the benefit of the Parties only. Except as
specifically provided in this Agreement, the Parties do not release any claims against any other
person or entity.
12. NetApp warrants that it has reviewed its financial situation and that it currently is
solvent within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b)(3) and 548(a)(1)(B)(ii)(I), and shall remain
solvent following payment to the United States of the Settlement Amount. Further, the Parties
warrant that, in evaluating whether to execute this Agreement, they (a) have intended that the
mutual promises, covenants, and obligations set forth constitute a contemporaneous exchange for new
value given to NetApp, within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(1), and (b) conclude that these
mutual promises, covenants, and obligations do, in fact, constitute such a contemporaneous
exchange. Further, the Parties warrant that the mutual promises, covenants, and obligations set
forth herein are intended to and do, in fact, represent a reasonably equivalent exchange of value
that is not intended to hinder, delay, or defraud any entity to which NetApp was or became indebted
to on or after the date of this transfer, within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(1).
13. Upon receipt of the payments described in Paragraph 1, above, the United States and
Relator shall promptly sign and file in the Civil Action a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal with
prejudice of the Civil Action pursuant to the terms of the Agreement. At or before the filing of
the Joint Stipulation of Dismissal, the United States shall also file a Notice of Intervention in
the Civil Action.
-9-
14. Except as expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement, each Party shall bear its
own legal and other costs incurred in connection with this matter, including the preparation and
performance of this Agreement.
15. NetApp represents that this Agreement is freely and voluntarily entered into without any
degree of duress or compulsion whatsoever.
16. Relator represents that this Agreement is freely and voluntarily entered into without any
degree of duress or compulsion whatsoever.
17. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the United States. The Parties agree that the
exclusive jurisdiction and venue for any dispute arising between and among the Parties under this
Agreement is the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
18. For purposes of construction, this Agreement shall be deemed to have been drafted by all
Parties to this Agreement and shall not, therefore, be construed against any Party for that reason
in any subsequent dispute.
19. This Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the Parties. This Agreement may
not be amended except by written consent of the Parties.
20. The individuals signing this Agreement on behalf of NetApp represent and warrant that they
are authorized by NetApp to execute this Agreement. The individual(s) signing this Agreement on
behalf of Relator represent and warrant that they are authorized by Relator to execute this
Agreement. The United States signatories represent that they are signing this Agreement in their
official capacities and that they are authorized to execute this Agreement.
21. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which constitutes an original and
all of which constitute one and the same Agreement.
-10-
22. This Agreement is binding on NetApps successors, transferees, heirs, and assigns.
23. This Agreement is binding on Relators successors, transferees, heirs, and assigns.
24. All parties consent to the United States disclosure of this Agreement, and information
about this Agreement, to the public.
25. This Agreement is effective on the date of signature of the last signatory to the
Agreement (Effective Date of this Agreement). Facsimiles of signatures shall Constitute
acceptable, binding signatures for purposes of this Agreement.
-11-
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4/6/09 |
BY: |
/s/ Sara McLean
|
|
|
|
Sara McLean, Esq. |
|
|
|
Rebecca Ford, Esq.
Trial Attorneys
Commercial Litigation Branch
Civil Division
United States Department of Justice |
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4/3/09 |
BY: |
/s/ Laurie Weinstein
|
|
|
|
Laurie Weinstein, Esq. |
|
|
|
Assistant United States Attorney
District of Columbia |
|
-12-
NETAPP. INC. & NETAPP U.S. PUBLIC SECTOR, INC. DEPENDANTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: April 6, 2009 |
BY: |
/s/ Nicholas Noviello
|
|
|
|
Nicholas Noviello |
|
|
|
Senior Vice President & Corporate Controller
NetApp, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4/7/2009 |
BY: |
/s/ Roger S. Goldman
|
|
|
|
Roger S. Goldman, Esq. |
|
|
|
Latham & Watkins, LLP
Counsel for Defendants |
|
|
-13-
IGOR KAPUSCINSKI RELATOR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4-3-09 |
By: |
/s/ Igor Kapuscinski
|
|
|
|
Igor Kapuscinski |
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4-3-09 |
|
/s/ Altomease R. Kennedy
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATED: 4-3-09 |
By: |
/s/ H. Vincent McKnight
|
|
|
|
H. Vincent McKnight, Esq. |
|
|
|
Altomease R. Kennedy, Esq.
Ashcraft & Gerel, LLP
Counsel for Igor Kapuscinski |
|
|
-14-
exv21w1
Exhibit 21.1
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
SUBSIDIARIES:
Network Appliance Ltd. (U.K.)
NetApp SAS (France)
Network Appliance Srl. (Italy)
NetApp GmbH (Germany)
NetApp Japan KK
NetApp Korea, Ltd.
Network Appliance (Shanghai) Commercial Co., Ltd.
Network Appliance (Sales)Limited (Ireland)
NetApp GmbH (Switzerland)
NetApp B.V.
NetApp GesmbH (Austria)
NetApp Sales Ltd. (Spain)
NetApp Global Ltd. (Bermuda)
NetApp Denmark ApS
NetApp Australia Pty. Ltd.
NetApp Mexico S. de R.L. de C.V.
NetApp Singapore Private Ltd.
Network Appliance (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
NetApp Systems (India) Private Ltd.
Network Appliance Argentina Srl
Network Appliance (Brasil) Ltd.
NetApp Canada Ltd.
NetApp BVBA (Belgium)
NetApp Israel Sales Ltd.
NetApp Israel R&D, Ltd.
NetApp Poland Sp. z.o.o.
NetApp U.S. Public Sector, Inc.
NetApp South Africa (Pty) Limited
Network Appliance Sweden AB
NetApp Finland Oy
NetApp Financial Solutions, Inc. (Delaware)
Spinnaker Networks, Inc. (Delaware)
Spinnaker Networks, LLC (Delaware)
NetApp Luxembourg S.a.r.l.
Alacritus, Inc. (Delaware)
Decru, Inc. (Delaware)
Decru BV (Netherlands)
NetApp Holding Ltd. (Cyprus)
NetApp Holding & Manufacturing BV NAHM (Netherlands)
NetApp Norway AS
NetApp Limited (Thailand)
NetApp Saudi Arabia LLFC
Decru Ltd. (U.K.)
Topio, Inc. (Delaware)
NetCache, Inc. (California)
Onaro, Inc. (Delaware)
Network Appliance (Hong Kong) Limited
Onaro Israel, Ltd.
NetApp Russia Limited
Onaro UK, Ltd.
NetApp Nigeria Limited
exv23w1
Exhibit 23.1
CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement Nos.
333-25277,
333-40307,
333-32318,
333-41384,
333-53776,
333-57378,
333-73982,
333-100837,
333-109627,
333-113200,
333-119640,
333-125448,
333-128098,
333-133564,
333-138337,
333-139835,
333-147034,
333-149375,
and
333-154867
on
Form S-8
and Registration Statement No. 333-159722 on Form S-4
of our report dated June 16, 2009, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial
statement schedule of NetApp, Inc. and its subsidiaries
(collectively, the Company) (which report expresses
an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
regarding the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes an Interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109) and our report dated June 16, 2009
relating to the effectiveness of the Companys internal
control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
of the Company for the year ended April 24, 2009.
/s/ DELOITTE &
TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
June 16, 2009
exv31w1
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(a)
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Daniel J. Warmenhoven, certify that:
1) I have reviewed this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of NetApp, Inc.;
2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,
and for, the periods presented in this report;
4) The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I
are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) for the
registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;
b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting,
or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, 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;
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report
our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
5) The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board
of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ DANIEL
J. WARMENHOVEN
Daniel J. Warmenhoven
Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
Date: June 16, 2009
exv31w2
Exhibit 31.2
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302(a)
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Steven J. Gomo, certify that:
1) I have reviewed this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
of NetApp, Inc.;
2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and
other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of,
and for, the periods presented in this report;
4) The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I
are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) for the
registrant and have:
a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or
caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;
b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting,
or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, 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;
c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report
our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
5) The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I
have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board
of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in
the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting.
Steven J. Gomo
Executive Vice President of Finance
and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer)
Date: June 16, 2009
exv32w1
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Daniel J. Warmenhoven, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
NetApp, Inc., on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended April 24, 2009 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
information contained in such Annual Report on
Form 10-K
fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
and results of operations of NetApp, Inc.
/s/ DANIEL
J. WARMENHOVEN
Daniel J. Warmenhoven
Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board
Date: June 16, 2009
exv32w2
Exhibit 32.2
CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Steven J. Gomo, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
NetApp, Inc., on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended April 24, 2009 fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
information contained in such Annual Report on
Form 10-K
fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition
and results of operations of NetApp, Inc.
Steven J. Gomo
Executive Vice President of Finance
and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer)
Date: June 16, 2009