As filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 8, 2006
Registration
No.
333-133947
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
AMENDMENT NO. 2
TO
Form
F-1
REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
MITEL NETWORKS CORPORATION
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada
|
|
3661
|
|
Not applicable
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
350 Legget Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K2K 2W7
(613) 592-2122
(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including
area code, of
Registrants principal executive offices)
CT Corporation System
111 Eighth Avenue, 13th Floor
New York, New York 10011
(212) 894-8940
(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number,
including area code, of
agent for service in the United States)
With copies to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riccardo A. Leofanti, Esq.
Skadden, Arps, Slate,
Meagher & Flom LLP
Suite 1750, 222 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5K 1J5
(416) 777-4700
|
|
Craig Wright, Esq.
Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP
Suite 1500, 50 OConnor Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1P 6L2
(613) 235-7234
|
|
Christopher J. Cummings, Esq.
Shearman & Sterling LLP
Suite 4405
Commerce Court West
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5L 1E8
(416) 360-8484
|
|
David A. Chaikof, Esq.
Torys LLP
Suite 3000
79 Wellington Street West
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5K 1N2
(416) 865-0040
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public:
As soon as practicable after this registration
statement becomes effective.
If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box.
o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering.
o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering.
o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earliest effective registration statement for the same
offering.
o
CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
Amount of
|
|
Title of Each Class of
|
|
|
Aggregate Offering
|
|
Registration
|
|
Securities to be Registered
|
|
|
Price
(1)(2)
|
|
Fee
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Shares
|
|
|
$150,000,000
|
|
$16,050
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Estimated solely for the purpose of computing the registration
fee pursuant to Rule 457(o) under the Securities Act of
1933 and based on a
bona fide
estimate of the public
offering price.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Includes shares the underwriters have the option to purchase to
cover
over-allotments,
if any.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Previously paid.
|
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until this
Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as
the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may
determine.
The information
in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. We may
not sell these securities until the registration statement filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This
prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and we are
not soliciting offers to buy these securities in any
jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
PROSPECTUS (Subject to
Completion)
Issued November 8, 2006
Shares
Mitel Networks Corporation
Common Shares
This is an initial public offering of our common shares in the
United States and Canada. We are
offering common
shares and the selling shareholders named in this prospectus are
offering common
shares. We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of
the common shares by the selling shareholders. No public market
currently exists for our shares. We anticipate that the initial
public offering price will be between
$ and
$ per
share.
We have applied for quotation of our common shares on the Nasdaq
Global Market and to list our common shares on the Toronto Stock
Exchange.
Investing in our common shares involves risks. See Risk
Factors beginning on page 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds to
|
|
|
|
|
Price to
|
|
|
Underwriting
|
|
|
|
|
Selling
|
|
|
|
|
Public
|
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
Proceeds to Us
|
|
|
Shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
We and the selling shareholders have granted the underwriters
the right to purchase up to an
additional common
shares to cover over-allotments.
The Securities and Exchange Commission and state securities
regulators have not approved or disapproved these securities, or
determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any
representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated and RBC Capital Markets
Corporation expect to deliver the shares to purchasers
on ,
2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morgan Stanley
|
|
RBC Capital Markets
|
|
Merrill Lynch & Co.
|
Genuity Capital Markets
Thomas Weisel Partners LLC
National Bank Financial Inc.
The date of this prospectus
is ,
2006.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
|
EX-10.65
|
|
EX-23.1
|
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with
information different from that contained in this prospectus. We
and the selling shareholders are offering to sell, and seeking
offers to buy, common shares only in jurisdictions where offers
and sales are permitted. The information contained in this
prospectus is accurate only as of the date of this prospectus,
regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or any
sale of our common shares.
Until ,
2006, 25 days after the date of this prospectus, all
dealers that buy, sell or trade our common shares, whether or
not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a
prospectus. This delivery requirement is in addition to the
obligation of dealers to deliver a prospectus when acting as
underwriters and with respect to their unsold allotments or
subscriptions.
i
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY
You should read the following summary together with the
entire prospectus, including the more detailed information in
our consolidated financial statements and related notes
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. You should carefully
consider, among other things, the matters discussed in
Risk Factors. We express all dollar amounts in
this prospectus in U.S. dollars, except where otherwise
indicated. References to $ are to U.S. dollars and
references to C$ are to Canadian dollars. See
Exchange Rate Information.
MITEL NETWORKS CORPORATION
Overview
We are a provider of integrated communications solutions and
services for business customers. Our Internet Protocol, or IP,
based communications solutions consist of a combination of
telephony hardware products, such as communications platforms
and desktop devices, and software applications that integrate
voice, video and data communications with business applications
and processes. We refer to these hardware products and software
applications as communications solutions because they are
configured to meet our customers specific communications
needs. We complement our communications solutions with a range
of services, including the design of communications networks,
implementation, maintenance, training and support services. We
believe that our IP-based communications solutions and services
enable our customers to realize significant cost benefits and to
conduct their business more effectively.
Historically, businesses have used a data network for their data
communications and a separate conventional telephony network for
their voice communications. Today, IP-based communications
systems enable businesses to address their voice, video and data
requirements using a single converged network.
Because converged networks have significant advantages over
maintaining separate voice and data networks, the global market
for business IP-based telephony products and services has grown
rapidly since 2002. Synergy Research Group, a technology market
research firm, estimates that enterprise IP-based telephony line
shipments grew by a compound annual growth rate of 68.7% from
2002 to 2005. Synergy estimates that enterprise IP-based
telephony market revenues will grow from approximately
$3.8 billion worldwide in 2005 to over $10.6 billion
by 2009, representing a compound annual growth rate of 29.2%. In
contrast, Synergy expects that revenue from conventional
telephony systems, often referred to within our industry as
legacy systems, will decline at a compound annual
rate of 40.9% from 2005 until 2009.
We have been a vendor of business communications systems for
over 25 years. Over the past five years, we have invested
heavily in the research and development of IP-based
communications solutions to take advantage of the telephone
communications industry shift from legacy systems to IP-based
systems. As a result of our efforts to realign our business to
discontinue certain activities relating to our legacy systems
and to focus our efforts on our IP-based communications
solutions we have incurred losses in each of the past five
fiscal years, including net losses of $44.6 million in
fiscal 2006 and $49.6 million in fiscal 2005. As at
April 30, 2006, we had an accumulated deficit of
$355.5 million. However, we believe our early and sustained
investment in IP-based research and development, and our
decision to concentrate our efforts on this other technology,
has positioned us well to take advantage of the industry shift
to IP-based communications solutions. As a result of this
strategic focus, we have experienced significant growth in
the sales of our IP-based communications solutions as
businesses migrate from their legacy systems. Our
IP-based
product
revenues represented 86% of total product revenue in fiscal
2006, an increase of 48% in comparison to fiscal 2005.
Additionally, 97% of our system shipments for the quarter ended
April 30, 2006 were IP-based communications solutions.
Our
IP-based
communications solutions are scalable, flexible, secure, easy to
deploy, manage and use, and are currently used by customers with
as few as 10 users in a single location to a customer with
systems that collectively support as many as 40,000 users
in multiple locations. Scalability refers to how well a hardware
or software system can adapt to increased demands and is a very
important feature because it means customers can invest in a
network with confidence that they will not outgrow it. Our
1
solutions can interoperate with various systems supplied by
other vendors, allowing our customers to migrate their legacy
systems towards an IP-based system at their own pace, and can
also be aligned with our customers business systems and
processes. We offer packaged software applications that are
designed to solve particular business communications challenges,
including applications for contact centers, mobility,
teleworking, messaging and collaboration. We also develop
solutions that focus on specific industries as well as custom
software applications that address the needs of specific
customers. Our customers include prominent hotel chains,
governmental agencies, retail chains and healthcare providers
worldwide. We operate from over 40 locations around the world
and we sell our communications solutions through a distribution
network of over 1,400 channel partners that includes wholesale
distributors, solutions providers, authorized resellers,
communication services providers, systems integrators, and other
distribution channels.
Our Competitive Strengths
Our key competitive strengths include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Focus on IP-based communications solutions.
As a result
of our early and sustained investment in IP-based research and
development, we believe we have one of the broadest portfolios
of IP-based communications solutions in our industry and one of
the industrys highest ratios of IP-based product shipments
to that of legacy products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interoperable, scalable and flexible solutions that enable IP
adoption.
Our IP-based communications solutions have been
designed to interoperate with most voice and data networks and
can be used by customers with as few as 10 users to as many as
65,000 users in a single network, which enables our customers to
migrate part or all of their voice communications towards a
converged IP-based solution at their own pace without worrying
that they will outgrow their communications system or lose their
investment in their existing legacy system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broad software capabilities that enable business process
improvements.
Our solutions are increasingly based on
software, which enhances the value of our hardware offering to
enable our customers to realize further business process
improvements. Our broad range of packaged software offerings
includes applications for contact centers, mobility,
teleworking, presence and collaboration, voice messaging,
unified communications, video conferencing and network
management.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Desktop portfolio focused on the user experience.
We
provide advanced wired and wireless desktop devices to our
customers to address their specific needs regardless of whether
the user is in the office, at home or traveling. Our desktop
products have been recognized for their innovation, ease of use,
industrial design and functionality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Communications solutions tailored to the needs of specific
industries.
We have made significant investments to develop
an understanding of the particular business requirements of
specific industries and markets, including education,
government, healthcare, hospitality and retail, which have
enabled us to tailor specific communications solutions for those
industries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leadership in small and medium-sized business market.
We
believe that our brand recognition and the flexibility of our
communications solutions have well positioned us to expand our
focus and addressable market from small and medium-sized
businesses to large enterprises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large, integrated distribution and strategic partner network.
We have developed a global sales and distribution network
with our channel partners that enables us to reach markets
around the world cost effectively, and have formed a network of
strategic partnerships and alliances that enables us to further
improve the functionality and features of our solutions through
joint research and development activities.
|
2
Our Strategy
Our strategy is to build from our leading position in the small
and medium-sized business market to also attract large
enterprise customers, increase our market share and generate
attractive returns for our shareholders. To accomplish these
objectives, we intend to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to expand our market focus through our highly
scalable solutions.
We continue to increase our market share
in the large enterprise market, given the ability of our
solutions to accommodate up to 65,000 users in a single network
configuration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase our focus on software applications.
To enhance
and differentiate our solutions we expect to continue to
increase our research and development focus on software
applications, such as fixed-mobile convergence (which allows for
the pairing or mobile wireless telephones and office
extensions), presence functionality (which, through the use of
an icon, indicates the status and availability of an individual
on any network) and our messaging products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provide a gradual migration path to IP for our customers and
those of our competitors.
We continue to offer innovative,
interoperable, high quality products to help our customers, and
our competitors customers, transition from legacy systems
to a converged IP-based communications system at their own pace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expand our geographic presence and distribution capabilities.
We continue to strategically expand our geographic presence
to position ourselves for the growing global demand for IP-based
communications solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broaden and deepen our strategic partnerships and alliances.
We continue to attract new strategic partners and establish
new strategic alliances to provide us with access to customer
relationships, opportunities in new target markets, and
enhancement of our brand recognition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to leverage our operating model.
We continue to
leverage our operating model by increasing our gross margins
through a continued focus on product cost reductions and growing
our revenues at a pace that exceeds the rate of growth of our
selling, general and administrative and research and development
expenses.
|
Risk Factors
We are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could
materially harm our business or inhibit our strategic plans.
Before investing in our common shares, you should carefully
consider the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
we have incurred net losses since our incorporation in 2001;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the development of the market opportunity for IP-based
communications solutions and related services may not develop as
we anticipate;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our solutions may fail to keep pace with technological
developments and evolving industry standards;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our dependence primarily upon one outside contract manufacturer
to manufacture our products;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our dependence on sole source and limited source suppliers for
key components;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the consequences of delays in the delivery of or lack of access
to software or other intellectual property licensed from our
suppliers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to protect our intellectual property and our
possible infringement of the intellectual property rights of
third parties;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our reliance on our channel partners for the majority of our
sales;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our solutions may contain design defects, errors, failures or
bugs;
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
we face intense competition from several competitors;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our reliance on strategic alliances;
|
|
|
|
|
|
uncertainties arising from our foreign operations;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the fluctuations in our quarterly and annual revenues and
operating results; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the other factors described in the section entitled
Risk Factors starting on page 8, and other
information provided throughout this prospectus.
|
Our principal executive offices are located at 350 Legget
Drive, Ottawa, Ontario Canada K2K 2W7 and our telephone
number is
(613)
592-2122.
Throughout this prospectus,
IP-based
refers to our
IP-based
solutions, which include pure IP communications solutions and
hybrid communications solutions in which our legacy products are
networked with our pure IP solutions, as part of our
customer migration strategy.
Throughout this prospectus we refer to packaged
software, which means software sold in a format that is
ready for use without customization, regardless of whether such
software is sold in a physical package, pre-installed or
downloaded electronically.
For investors outside the United States and Canada.
Neither we nor any of the underwriters have done anything that
would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this
prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is
required, other than in the United States and Canada. You are
required to inform yourselves about and to observe any
restrictions relating to this offering and the distribution of
this prospectus.
4
THE OFFERING
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares offered by Mitel Networks Corporation
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares offered by the selling shareholders
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares to be outstanding following
the offering
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
Use of Proceeds
|
|
We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering to fund
working capital; to expand our selling, marketing and global
support capabilities; to undertake research and development; and
for general corporate purposes, which may include acquisitions.
We will not receive any of the net proceeds from the sale of
common shares by the selling shareholders. See Use of
Proceeds.
|
|
|
|
Proposed Nasdaq Global Market Symbol
|
|
MITL
|
|
|
|
Proposed Toronto Stock Exchange Symbol
|
|
MIL
|
The number of common shares to be outstanding after this
offering is based
on shares
outstanding as of September 30, 2006 as adjusted by the
assumptions set out below but does not include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,108,106 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
stock options outstanding under our stock option and equity
incentive plans at a weighted average exercise price of $1.07
per share, as of September 30, 2006;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,380,197 additional common shares reserved for issuance
under our stock option and equity incentive plans;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,174,887 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants held by Technology Partnerships Canada as
of September 30, 2006, which are exercisable for common
shares without the payment of any additional cash consideration;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,500,000 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants held by holders of our convertible notes at
an exercise price calculated in accordance with a formula based
on the market price of our common shares
(see Description of Convertible Notes
Noteholder Warrants); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a number of common shares issuable upon the conversion of
outstanding convertible notes determined by dividing the
outstanding principal and accrued interest owing on each note by
a conversion price calculated in accordance with a formula based
on the market price of our common shares
(see Description of
Convertible Notes Convertible Notes).
|
Unless we specifically state otherwise, all information in this
prospectus:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assumes an initial public offering price of
$ per common share;
|
|
|
|
|
|
assumes conversion of all of our outstanding preferred shares
into an aggregate
of common shares,
which will occur in connection with the completion of this
offering;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assumes the exercise
of warrants
held by Wesley Clover into an aggregate
of common
shares, which will occur in connection with the completion of
this offering;
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assumes the exercise of the warrants held by a financing agent
and warrants issued in connection with our Class A
Series 1 Convertible and Redeemable Preferred Shares
(Series A Preferred Shares) into an aggregate
of 6,000,000 common shares, which will occur in connection with
the completion of this offering;
|
|
|
|
|
|
assumes no exercise by the underwriters of their
over-allotment
option;
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
reflects, for all prior periods,
a for reverse
split of our common shares, which will occur prior to the
completion of this offering.
|
See Description of Share Capital.
6
Summary Consolidated Financial Data
The following sets forth summary consolidated financial data
derived from (a) our audited consolidated financial
statements as of and for the fiscal years ended April 25,
2004, April 24, 2005 and April 30, 2006 which are
included elsewhere in this prospectus, (b) our audited
consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal years
ended April 28, 2002 and April 27, 2003 which are not
included in this prospectus, and (c) our audited
consolidated financial statements as of and for the
six-day
transition
period ended April 30, 2005, which are included elsewhere
in this prospectus. The data set out below does not take into
account the conversion of our outstanding preferred shares into
common shares, the exercise of the warrants held by a financing
agent or the exercise of the warrants issued in connection with
our Series A Preferred Shares. On April 24, 2005, we
changed our fiscal year end from the last Sunday in April to
April 30. The change in our fiscal year end
(and resulting alignment of fiscal quarter ends)
permits us to better align our reporting results with industry
norms. Our consolidated financial statements are reported in
U.S. dollars and have been prepared in accordance with United
States generally accepted accounting principles, or U.S. GAAP.
Historical results do not necessarily indicate results expected
for any future period. You should read the following summary
consolidated financial data together with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus. The pro forma balance sheet data below gives
effect to the conversion of all of our outstanding preferred
shares into common shares, and the exercise of the warrants held
by a financing agent and warrants issued in connection with our
Series A Preferred Shares, which will occur in connection
with the completion of this offering. The pro forma as adjusted
balance sheet data below also gives effect to our sale
of common
shares in this offering at an assumed initial public offering
price of
$ per
share, after deducting the underwriting commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Days
|
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 28,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
358.0
|
|
|
$
|
352.2
|
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
215.5
|
|
|
|
225.4
|
|
|
|
202.9
|
|
|
|
213.2
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
225.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
142.5
|
|
|
|
126.8
|
|
|
|
137.8
|
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
161.4
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
59.1
|
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
36.2
|
|
|
|
41.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
141.9
|
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
111.4
|
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
120.7
|
|
|
Special
charges
(1)
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.4
|
)
|
|
Amortization of acquired
intangibles
(2)
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(111.2
|
)
|
|
|
(72.1
|
)
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
(41.3
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
39.8
|
|
|
Income tax (recovery) expense
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(114.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(70.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(44.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(1.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.63
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.26
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.49
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.44
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding
|
|
|
106,848,314
|
|
|
|
113,109,751
|
|
|
|
127,831,211
|
|
|
|
113,792,829
|
|
|
|
117,149,933
|
|
|
|
117,230,198
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-GAAP Financial Measure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(114.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(70.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(44.6
|
)
|
|
Add back: fair value adjustment on derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net
loss
(3)
|
|
$
|
(114.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(70.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(44.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As at April 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
As Adjusted
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
35.7
|
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
40.5
|
|
|
|
47.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
199.8
|
|
|
|
206.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt including capital leases
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments
(5)
|
|
|
75.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
304.2
|
|
|
|
228.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable
shares
(6)
|
|
|
64.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders (deficit) equity
|
|
|
(168.6
|
)
|
|
|
(22.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and to realign our business.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Acquired intangible assets relating to the acquisition of the
Mitel name, certain assets and subsidiaries from Zarlink
Semiconductor Inc. in 2001 were fully amortized in 2004.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
We define adjusted net loss as net loss excluding the change in
the fair value of the derivative instruments. This definition
may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by
other companies. We are presenting adjusted net loss because we
believe it provides a more complete understanding of our
business than could be obtained without this disclosure, as it
eliminates a
non-cash
charge that will be eliminated immediately following this
offering. The change in the fair value in derivative instruments
resulted from our issuance of convertible, redeemable preferred
shares that give holders the right, at any time after five
years, to require us to redeem these shares for cash. The
requirement to redeem these shares on an
as-if-converted-to-common share basis qualifies as an embedded
derivative. The embedded derivative is being marked to market
throughout the period to redemption with a non-cash charge being
reflected in our Consolidated Statement of Operations. Adjusted
net loss shows what our net income would have been without the
effect of this non-cash charge. We believe that this is a useful
measure to our investors as the convertible, redeemable
preferred shares will automatically convert into common shares
in connection with the closing of this offering with the result
being the elimination of this non-cash charge in the future. The
use of adjusted net loss has limitations and you should not
consider adjusted net loss in isolation from or as an
alternative to U.S. GAAP measures, such as net income or cash
flow statement data that are prepared in accordance with U.S.
GAAP, or as a measure of profitability or liquidity.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Assumes net proceeds to us from this offering of
$ million.
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per share
would increase (decrease) pro forma as adjusted cash and
cash equivalents, working capital, total assets and total
shareholders (deficit) equity by
$ million,
(i) assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set
forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and
(ii) after deducting estimated underwriting commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
The derivative instruments relate to the Series A Preferred
Shares and the Class B Series 1 Convertible and
Redeemable Preferred Shares (Series B Preferred
Shares). The derivative instruments arose because a
portion of the redemption price of the Series A Preferred
Shares and Series B Preferred Shares is indexed to our
common share price and as required by SFAS 133 has been
bifurcated and accounted for separately.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
Redeemable shares include 10,000,000 common shares (which are
redeemable by virtue of a shareholders agreement dated
April 23, 2004, as amended, among certain of our
shareholders and us), 20,000,000 Series A Preferred Shares
and 67,789,300 Series B Preferred Shares. The right of the
holder to require us to redeem the 10,000,000 common shares
terminates upon the completion of this offering. The pro forma
columns reflect the termination of this right.
|
8
RISK FACTORS
An investment in our common shares should be regarded as
highly speculative and is suitable only for those investors who
are able to sustain a total loss of their investment. You should
carefully consider the following risks, as well as the other
information contained in this prospectus, when evaluating us and
our business and prospects. Any of the following risks, as well
as risks not currently known to us, could materially and
adversely affect our business, results of operations or
financial condition, and could result in a complete loss of your
investment.
Risks Relating to our Business
We have incurred net losses since our incorporation in 2001
and we may not be profitable in the future.
We incurred a net loss of $44.6 million for the fiscal year
ended April 30, 2006, and net losses of $49.6 million,
$30.6 million, $70.1 million and $114.7 million
in fiscal 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. We may not be
able to achieve profitability or, if achieved, may not be able
to sustain profitability. We have incurred restructuring charges
in each of the previous five fiscal years, in the quarter ending
October 31, 2006, and may incur additional restructuring
charges in the future. Our future success in attaining
profitability and growing our revenues and market share for our
solutions depends, among other things, upon our ability to
develop solutions that have a competitive advantage, to build
our brand image and reputation, to attract orders from new and
existing customers and to reduce our costs as a proportion of
our revenue by, among other things, increasing efficiency in
design, component sourcing, manufacturing and assembly cost
processes.
A key component of our strategy is our focus on the
development and marketing of
IP-based
communications
solutions and related services, and this strategy may not be
successful or may adversely affect our business.
We are focused on the development and sales of
IP-based
communications
solutions. Our operating results may be adversely affected if
the market opportunity for
IP-based
communications
solutions and services does not develop in the way we
anticipate.
IP-based
communications systems currently constitute a small percentage
of global installed large enterprise telephony systems. If
IP-based
communications
do not gain widespread acceptance in the marketplace as an
alternative replacement option for traditional business
telephony systems, our overall revenues and operating results
will be adversely affected. Because this market opportunity is
in its early stages, we cannot predict whether:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the demand for
IP-based
communications solutions and services will grow as fast as we
anticipate;
|
|
|
|
|
|
continuing reductions in long-distance and local toll charges
may adversely affect sales of certain of our solutions to
customers focused on those cost savings;
|
|
|
|
|
|
current or future competitors or new technologies will cause the
market to evolve in a manner different than we expect;
|
|
|
|
|
|
other technologies will become more accepted or standard in our
industry; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
we will be able to achieve a leadership or profitable position
as this opportunity develops.
|
Our solutions may fail to keep pace with rapidly changing
technology and evolving industry standards.
The markets for our solutions are competitive and characterized
by rapidly changing technology, evolving industry standards,
frequent new product introductions, and short product life
cycles. Therefore, our operating results depend, among other
things, on existing and emerging markets, our ability to develop
and introduce new solutions and our ability to reduce the
production costs of existing solutions. The process of
developing new technology is complex and uncertain, and if we
fail to accurately predict and respond to our customers
changing needs and emerging technological trends, our business
could be
9
harmed. We must commit significant resources to developing new
solutions before knowing whether our investments will result in
solutions the market will accept. The success of new solutions
depends on several factors, including new application and
product definition, component costs, timely completion and
introduction of these solutions, differentiation of new
solutions from those of our competitors, and market acceptance
of these solutions. We may not be able to successfully identify
new market opportunities for our solutions, develop and bring
new solutions to market in a timely manner, or achieve market
acceptance of our solutions.
Because we depend primarily upon one outside contract
manufacturer to manufacture our products, our operations could
be delayed or interrupted if we encounter problems with this
contractor.
We do not have any internal manufacturing capabilities, and we
rely upon a small number of contract manufacturers to
manufacture our products. Substantially all of our products are
currently manufactured by BreconRidge Manufacturing Solutions
Corporation (BreconRidge), a company of which Dr.
Terence H. Matthews, our principal shareholder and the Chairman
of our Board of Directors, has an approximate 28.23% ownership
interest. Our manufacturing agreement with BreconRidge expires
on December 31, 2007, and may or may not be renewed. Our
ability to ship products to our customers could be delayed or
interrupted as a result of a variety of factors relating to our
contract manufacturers, in particular BreconRidge, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
our contract manufacturers not being required to manufacture our
products on a
long-term
basis in any specific quantity or at any specific price;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our failure to effectively manage our contract manufacturer
relationships;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our contract manufacturers experiencing delays, disruptions or
quality control problems in their manufacturing operations;
|
|
|
|
|
|
lead-times
for required
materials and components varying significantly and being
dependent on factors such as the specific supplier, contract
terms and the demand for each component at a given time;
|
|
|
|
|
|
overestimating our forecast requirements resulting in excess
inventory and related carrying charges;
|
|
|
|
|
|
underestimating our requirements, resulting in our contract
manufacturers having inadequate materials and components
required to produce our products, or overestimating our
requirements, resulting in charges assessed by the contract
manufacturers or liabilities for excess inventory, each of which
could negatively affect our gross margins; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the possible absence of adequate capacity and reduced control
over component availability, quality assurances, delivery
schedules, manufacturing yields and costs.
|
The addition of manufacturing locations or other contract
manufacturers would increase the complexity of our supply chain
management. If any of our contract manufacturers are unable or
unwilling to continue manufacturing our products in required
volumes and quality levels, we will have to identify, qualify,
select and implement acceptable alternative manufacturers, which
would likely be time consuming and costly. In addition, an
alternate source may not be available to us or may not be in a
position to satisfy our production requirements at commercially
reasonable prices and quality. Therefore, any significant
interruption in manufacturing would result in us being unable to
deliver the affected products to meet our customer orders.
We depend on sole source and limited source suppliers for key
components. If these components are not available on a timely
basis, or at all, we may not be able to meet scheduled product
deliveries to our customers.
We depend on sole source and limited source suppliers for key
components of our products. In addition, our contract
manufacturers often acquire these components through purchase
orders and may have no
long-term
commitments
regarding supply or pricing from their suppliers.
Lead-times
for various
10
components may lengthen, which may make certain components
scarce. As component demand increases and
lead-times
become
longer, our suppliers may increase component costs. We also
depend on anticipated product orders to determine our materials
requirements.
Lead-times
for
limited-source
materials and components can be as long as six months, vary
significantly and depend on factors such as the specific
supplier, contract terms and demand for a component at a given
time. From time to time, shortages in allocations of components
have resulted in delays in filling orders. Shortages and delays
in obtaining components in the future could impede our ability
to meet customer orders. Any of these sole source or limited
source suppliers could stop producing the components, cease
operations entirely, or be acquired by, or enter into exclusive
arrangements with, our competitors. As a result, these sole
source and limited source suppliers may stop selling their
components to our contract manufacturers at commercially
reasonable prices, or at all. Any such interruption, delay or
inability to obtain these components from alternate sources at
acceptable prices and within a reasonable amount of time would
adversely affect our ability to meet scheduled product
deliveries to our customers and reduce margins realized.
Delay in the delivery of, or lack of access to, software or
other intellectual property licensed from our suppliers could
adversely affect our ability to develop and deliver our
solutions on a timely and reliable basis.
Our business may be harmed by a delay in delivery of software
applications from one or more of our suppliers. Many of our
solutions are designed to include software or other intellectual
property licensed from third parties. It may be necessary in the
future to seek or renew licenses relating to various components
in our solutions. These licenses may not be available on
acceptable terms, or at all. Moreover, the inclusion in our
solutions of software or other intellectual property licensed
from third parties on a
non-exclusive
basis
could limit our ability to protect our proprietary rights to our
solutions.
Non-exclusive
licenses
also allow our suppliers to develop relationships with, and
supply similar or the same software applications to, our
competitors. Software licenses could terminate in the event of a
bankruptcy or insolvency of a software supplier or other third
party licensor. We have not entered into source code escrow
agreements with every software supplier or third party licensor.
In the event that software suppliers or other third party
licensors terminate their relationships with us, are unable to
fill our orders on a timely basis or the licenses are otherwise
terminated, we may be unable to deliver the affected products to
meet our customer orders.
Our success is dependent on our intellectual property. Our
inability or failure to protect our intellectual property could
seriously harm our ability to compete and our financial
success.
Our success depends on the intellectual property in the
solutions and services that we develop and sell. We rely upon a
combination of copyright, patent, trade secrets, trademarks,
confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect
our proprietary technology. Our present protective measures may
not be enforceable or adequate to prevent misappropriation of
our technology or independent
third-party
development
of the same or similar technology. Even if our patents are held
valid and enforceable, others may be able to design around these
patents or develop products competitive to our products but that
are outside the scope of these patents.
We make use of some open source software code under various open
source licenses available to the general public. A
characteristic of an open source license is that it does not
provide any indemnification to the licensee against third-party
claims of intellectual property infringement. Some open source
licenses require the licensee to disclose the licensees
source code derived from such open source code, and failure to
comply with the terms of such licenses can result in the
licensee being stopped from distributing products that contain
the open source code or being forced to freely disseminate
enhancements that were made to the open source code. Further,
the use of open source software in our solutions may expose
those solutions to security risks.
Many foreign jurisdictions offer less protection of intellectual
property rights than Canada and the United States, and the
protection provided to our proprietary technology by the laws of
these and other foreign jurisdictions may not be sufficient to
protect our technology. Preventing the unauthorized use of
11
our proprietary technology may be difficult, time consuming and
costly, in part because it may be difficult to discover
unauthorized use by third parties. Litigation may be necessary
in the future to enforce our intellectual property rights, to
protect our trade secrets, to determine the validity and scope
of our proprietary rights, or to defend against claims of
unenforceability or invalidity. Any litigation, whether
successful or unsuccessful, could result in substantial costs
and diversion of management resources.
Our business may be harmed if we infringe intellectual
property rights of third parties.
There is considerable patent and other intellectual property
development activity in our industry. Our success depends, in
part, upon our not infringing intellectual property rights owned
by others. Our competitors, as well as a number of individuals,
patent holding companies and consortiums, own, or claim to own,
intellectual property relating to our industry. Aggressive
patent litigation is not uncommon in our industry and can be
disruptive. We cannot determine with certainty whether any
existing
third-party
patent, or the issuance of new third party patents, would
require us to alter our solutions, obtain licenses or
discontinue the sale of the affected applications and products.
We have received notices, and we may receive additional notices,
containing allegations that our solutions are subject to patents
or other proprietary rights of third parties, including
competitors, patent holding companies and consortiums. In
addition, in June 2006, one of our competitors filed a complaint
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia alleging that we are infringing on certain of its
patents and requesting damages (treble damages in respect of
alleged willful infringement of the patents), injunctive relief,
attorneys fees, costs and expenses, and such further
relief against us as the court deems just and proper. See
Business Legal Proceedings for a more
complete description of this proceeding.
Our success also depends, in part, upon our customers
freedom to use our products. For example, certain claims have
been asserted against
end-users
within our
industry and demands for the payment of licensing fees have been
made of
end-users
who
have implemented our solutions. We generally agree to indemnify
and defend our customers to the extent a claim for infringement
is brought against our customers with respect to our solutions.
Infringement claims (or claims for indemnification resulting
from infringement claims) have been and may in the future be
asserted or prosecuted against us or our customers by third
parties. Some of these third parties, including competitors,
patent holding companies and consortiums, have, or have access
to, substantially greater resources than we do and may be better
able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation. Whether
or not these claims have merit, we may be subject to costly and
time-consuming
legal
proceedings, and this could divert our managements
attention from operating our business. If these claims are
successfully asserted against us, we could be required to pay
substantial damages and could be prevented from selling some or
all of our solutions. In addition, an infringer of a United
States patent may be subject to treble damages and
attorneys fees if the infringement is found to be willful.
We may also be obligated to indemnify our business partners or
customers in any such litigation. Furthermore, in order to
resolve such proceedings, we may need to obtain licenses from
third parties or substantially modify or rename our solutions in
order to avoid infringement. Moreover, license agreements with
third parties may not include all intellectual property rights
that may be issued to or owned by the licensors, and future
disputes with these parties are possible. In addition, we might
not be able to obtain the necessary licenses on acceptable
terms, or at all, or be able to modify or rename our solutions
successfully. This could prevent us from selling some or all of
our solutions. Current or future negotiations with third parties
to establish license or cross license arrangements, or to renew
existing licenses, may not be successful and we may not be able
to obtain or renew a license on satisfactory terms or at all. If
required licenses cannot be obtained, or if existing licenses
are not renewed, litigation could result. Any litigation
relating to intellectual property rights, whether or not
determined in our favor or settled by us, could at a minimum be
costly and would divert the attention and efforts of management
and our technical personnel. An adverse determination in any
litigation or proceeding could prevent us from making, using or
selling some or all of our solutions and subject us to damage
assessments.
12
We rely on our channel partners for the majority of our
sales, and disruptions to, or our failure to effectively develop
and manage, our distribution channel and the processes and
procedures that support it could adversely affect our ability to
generate revenues.
Our future success is highly dependent upon establishing and
maintaining successful relationships with a variety of channel
partners. A substantial portion of our revenues is derived
through our channel partners, most of which also sell our
competitors products. Our revenues depend in part on the
performance of these channel partners. The loss of or reduction
in sales to these channel partners could materially reduce our
revenues. Our competitors may in some cases be effective in
causing resellers or potential resellers to favor their products
or prevent or reduce sales of our solutions. If we fail to
maintain relationships with these channel partners, fail to
develop new relationships with channel partners in new markets
or expand the number of channel partners in existing markets, or
if we fail to manage, train or provide appropriate incentives to
existing channel partners or if these channel partners are not
successful in their sales efforts, sales of our solutions may
decrease and our operating results would suffer.
The most likely potential channel partners for us are those
businesses engaged in voice communications business or the data
communications business. Many potential channel partners in the
voice communications business have established relationships
with our competitors and may not be willing to invest the time
and resources required to train their staff to effectively
market our solutions and services. Potential channel partners
engaged in the data communications business are less likely to
have established relationships with our competitors, but where
they are unfamiliar with the voice communications business, they
may require substantially more training and other resources to
be qualified to sell our solutions. We have been using our
channel partners to sell our solutions to small and medium-sized
businesses. We cannot assure you that we will be able to develop
channel partners to sell to large enterprises or that our
existing channel partners will be effective in selling to large
enterprises. In addition, as sales of software applications
become increasingly important to us, we may need to find
additional channel partners skilled in the sale and
implementation of such software applications.
Design defects, errors, failures or bugs, which
may be difficult to detect, may occur in our solutions.
We produce highly complex solutions that incorporate both
hardware and software. Software can contain bugs that can
interfere with expected operations. Our preshipment testing
programs may not be adequate to detect all defects in individual
applications and products or systematic defects that could
affect numerous shipments, which might interfere with customer
satisfaction, reduce sales opportunities or affect gross
margins. In the past, we have had to replace certain components
and provide remediation in response to the discovery of defects
or bugs in solutions that we had shipped. Any future remediation
may have a material impact on our business. Our inability to
cure an application or product defect could result in the
failure of an application or product line, the temporary or
permanent withdrawal from an application or product or market,
damage to our reputation, inventory costs, or application or
product reengineering expenses. The sale and support of
applications and products containing defects and errors may
result in product liability claims and warranty claims. Our
insurance may not cover or may be insufficient to cover claims
that are successfully asserted against us or our contracted
suppliers and manufacturers.
We face intense competition from many competitors and we may
not be able to compete effectively against these competitors.
The market for our solutions is highly competitive. We compete
against many companies, including Cisco Systems, Inc., Nortel
Networks Corporation, Avaya Inc., 3Com Corp, Alcatel,
Inter-Tel,
Incorporated
and Siemens AG. In addition, because the market for our
solutions is subject to rapidly changing technologies, we may
face competition in the future from companies that do not
currently compete in the business communications market,
including companies that currently compete in other sectors of
the information technology, communications or software
industries, mobile communications companies, or communications
companies that serve residential rather than business customers.
13
Several of our existing competitors have, and many of our future
competitors may have, greater financial, personnel, research,
and other resources, and more
well-established
brands
or reputations and broader customer bases than we have. As a
result, these competitors may be in a stronger position to
respond more quickly to potential acquisitions and other market
opportunities, new or emerging technologies and changes in
customer requirements. Some of these competitors may also have
customer bases that are more geographically balanced than ours
and therefore may be less affected by an economic downturn in a
particular region. Competitors with greater resources may also
be able to offer lower prices, additional products or services
or other incentives that we cannot match or do not offer. In
addition, existing customers of data communications companies
that compete against us may be more inclined to purchase
business communications solutions from their current data
communications vendor than from us. Also, as voice and data
communications converge, we may face competition from systems
integrators that were traditionally focused on data network
integration. We cannot predict which competitors may enter our
markets in the future, what form the competition may take or
whether we will be able to respond effectively to the entry of
new competitors or the rapid evolution in technology and product
development that has characterized our markets. Competition from
existing and potential market entrants may take many forms,
including large bundled offerings that incorporate applications
and products similar to those that we offer. If our competitors
offer deep discounts on certain products or services in an
effort to recapture or gain market share, we may be required to
lower our prices or offer other favorable terms to compete
effectively, which would reduce our margins and could adversely
affect our operating results.
Our business may suffer if our strategic alliances are not
successful.
We have a number of strategic alliances and continue to pursue
strategic alliances with other companies in areas where
collaboration can produce industry advancement and acceleration
of new markets. The objectives and goals for a strategic
alliance can include one or more of the following: technology
exchange, product development, joint sales and marketing, or
new-market
creation. If
a strategic alliance fails to perform as expected or if the
relationship is terminated, we could experience delays in
product availability or impairment of our relationships with
customers. In addition, we may face increased competition if a
third party acquires one or more of our strategic partners or if
our competitors enter into additional successful strategic
relationships.
Our operations in international markets involve inherent
risks that we may not be able to control.
We do business in over 90 countries and are increasing our
activities in foreign jurisdictions. Accordingly, our future
results could be materially and adversely affected by a variety
of uncontrollable and changing factors relating to international
business operations, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
political or social unrest or economic instability in a specific
country or region;
|
|
|
|
|
|
macroeconomic conditions adversely affecting geographies where
we do business;
|
|
|
|
|
|
higher costs of doing business in foreign countries;
|
|
|
|
|
|
infringement claims on foreign patents, copyrights, or trademark
rights;
|
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in managing operations across disparate geographic
areas;
|
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties associated with enforcing agreements and
intellectual property rights through foreign legal systems;
|
|
|
|
|
|
trade protection measures and other regulatory requirements
which may affect our ability to import or export our products
from or to various countries;
|
|
|
|
|
|
adverse tax consequences;
|
|
|
|
|
|
unexpected changes in legal and regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
|
|
|
military conflict, terrorist activities, natural disasters and
widespread medical epidemics; and
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to recruit and retain channel partners in foreign
jurisdictions.
|
Our competitive position may be affected by fluctuations in
exchange rates, and our current currency hedging strategy may
not be sufficient to counter such fluctuations.
A significant portion of our business is conducted, and a
substantial portion of our operating expenses are payable, in
currencies other than the U.S. dollar. Due to the substantial
volatility of currency exchange rates, we cannot predict the
effect of exchange rate fluctuations upon future sales and
expenses. We use financial instruments, principally forward
exchange contracts, in our management of foreign currency
exposure. These contracts primarily require us to purchase and
sell certain foreign currencies with or for U.S. dollars at
contracted rates. We may be exposed to a credit loss in the
event of non-performance by the counterparties of these
contracts. These financial instruments may not adequately manage
our foreign currency exposure. Our results of operations could
be adversely affected if we are unable to successfully manage
currency fluctuations in the future.
Our quarterly and annual revenues and operating results have
historically fluctuated, and the results of one period may not
provide a reliable indicator of our future performance.
Our quarterly and annual revenues and operating results have
historically fluctuated and are not necessarily indicative of
results to be expected in future periods. A number of factors
may cause our financial results to fluctuate significantly from
period to period, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the fact that an individual order or contract can represent a
substantial amount of revenues for that period;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the size, timing and shipment of individual orders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in pricing or discount levels by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
|
|
foreign currency exchange rates;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the mix of products sold by us;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the timing of the announcement, introduction and delivery of new
products and/or product enhancements by us and our competitors;
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions.
|
As a result of the above factors, a quarterly or yearly
comparison of our results of operations is not necessarily
meaningful.
We may require additional sources of funds if our sources of
liquidity are unavailable or insufficient to fund our
operations.
We may not be able to generate sufficient cash from our
operations to meet unanticipated working capital requirements,
support additional capital expenditures or take advantage of
acquisition opportunities. If we need to secure additional
sources of equity or debt financing, our ability to obtain
additional financing will be subject to a number of factors,
including market conditions and our operating performance.
Additional financing may not be available on terms satisfactory
to us, or at all. If we were to incur high levels of debt, we
would require a larger portion of our operating cash flow to be
used to pay principal and interest on our indebtedness. The
increased use of cash to pay indebtedness could leave us with
insufficient funds to finance our operating activities, such as
research and development and capital expenditures. In addition,
debt instruments may contain covenants or other restrictions
that affect our business operations. If we raise additional
funds by selling equity securities, the relative ownership of
our existing investors could be diluted or the new investors
could obtain terms more favorable than previous investors.
15
The exercise of redemption rights by one or more of our
convertible noteholders would have a material adverse effect on
our cash flow and financial position.
Under the terms of our convertible notes, in the event of a
default, the holders of the convertible notes have the right to
require us to redeem all or a portion of the convertible notes
outstanding. The maximum amount we would be required to pay the
holders of the convertible notes in the event of a default is
$55 million plus any accrued and unpaid interest. In
addition, in the event of a fundamental change that occurs prior
to April 28, 2010, each convertible noteholder will have
the option to either convert all or a portion of the
holders convertible notes into common shares or obligate
us to repurchase all or a portion of the convertible notes and,
in the former case, will also be entitled to receive from us a
premium in the form of additional common shares or cash at our
option. Under the terms of the convertible notes, a fundamental
change includes the sale of all or substantially all of our
property or assets, a change of control, a shareholder-approved
liquidation or dissolution, a merger or acquisition, or the
number of our common shares held directly or indirectly by
Dr. Matthews falling below 115,000,000 (subject to
adjustments for stock splits, consolidations or other similar
adjustments). See Description of Convertible Notes
for a summary of the principal terms of our convertible notes,
including the events of default.
We are exposed to risks inherent in our defined benefit
pension plan.
We currently maintain a defined benefit pension plan, which was
closed to new employees in June 2001, for a number of our past
and present employees in the United Kingdom. The contributions
to fund benefit obligations under this plan are based on
actuarial valuations, which themselves are based on certain
assumptions about the
long-term
operation of
the plan, including employee turnover and retirement rates, the
performance of the financial markets and interest rates. If the
actual operation of the plan differs from these assumptions,
additional contributions by us may be required. As of
April 30, 2006, the accumulated benefit obligation of
$144.3 million exceeded the fair value of the plan assets
of $104.2 million, resulting in a pension liability of
$40.1 million. Changes to pension legislation in the United
Kingdom may adversely affect our funding requirements.
Transfer pricing rules may adversely affect our income tax
expenses.
We conduct business operations in various jurisdictions and
through legal entities in Canada, the United States, the United
Kingdom, Barbados and elsewhere. We and certain of our
subsidiaries provide solutions and services to, and may from
time to time undertake certain significant transactions with,
other subsidiaries in different jurisdictions. The tax laws of
many of these jurisdictions, including Canada, have detailed
transfer pricing rules which require that all transactions with
non-resident related parties be priced using arms length
pricing principles, and contemporaneous documentation must exist
to support this pricing. The taxation authorities in the
jurisdictions where we carry on business, including the Canada
Revenue Agency, the United States Internal Revenue Service and
HM Revenue & Customs in the United Kingdom, could
challenge our arms length related party transfer pricing
policies. International transfer pricing is an area of taxation
that depends heavily on the underlying facts and circumstances
and generally involves a significant degree of judgment. If any
of these taxation authorities are successful in challenging our
transfer pricing policies, our income tax expense may be
adversely affected and we could also be subjected to interest
and penalty charges. Any increase in our income tax expense and
related interest and penalties could have a significant impact
on our future earnings and future cash flows.
Future changes in financial accounting standards could
adversely affect our reported results of operations.
A change in accounting policies could have a significant effect
on our reported results and may even affect our reporting of
transactions completed before the change is effective. New
pronouncements and varying interpretations of pronouncements
have occurred with frequency and may occur in the future.
Changes to existing rules or the questioning of current
practices may adversely affect our reported financial results or
the way we conduct our business.
16
In particular, in December 2004 the Financial Accounting
Standards Board issued a statement requiring companies to record
stock option grants as compensation expense in their income
statements. This statement is effective beginning with our first
quarter of fiscal 2007. Our current methodology for expensing
stock options is based on, among other things, the historical
volatility of the underlying stock and the expected life of our
stock options. The adoption of this accounting standard could
negatively impact our profitability and may adversely impact our
stock price.
Governmental regulation could harm our operating results and
future prospects.
Governments in a number of jurisdictions in which we conduct
business have imposed export license requirements and
restrictions on the import or export of some technologies,
including some of the technologies used in our solutions.
Changes in these laws or regulations could adversely affect our
revenues. A number of governments also have laws and regulations
that govern technical specifications for the provision of our
solutions. Changes in these laws or regulations could adversely
affect the sales of, decrease the demand for, and increase the
cost of, our solutions. For example, the Federal Communications
Commission may issue regulatory pronouncements from time to time
that may mandate new standards for our equipment in the United
States. These pronouncements could require costly changes to our
hardware and software. Additionally, certain government agencies
currently require voice-over-Internet-Protocol products to be
certified through a lengthy testing process. Other government
agencies may adopt similar lengthy certification procedures
which could delay the delivery of our products and adversely
affect our revenues.
Our future success depends on our existing key personnel.
Our success is dependent upon the services of a number of the
members of our senior management and software and engineering
staff, as well as the expertise of our directors. Competition
for highly skilled directors, management, research and
development and other employees is intense in our industry and
we may not be able to attract and retain highly qualified
directors, management, and research and development personnel in
the future. In order to improve productivity, a portion of our
compensation to key employees and directors is in the form of
stock option grants, and as a consequence, a depression in our
share price could make it difficult for us to motivate and
retain employees and recruit additional qualified directors and
personnel. The recent decision by the Financial Accounting
Standards Board regarding the accounting treatment of stock
options as compensation expense could lead to a reduction in our
use of stock options as an incentive and retention tool. We
currently do not maintain corporate life insurance policies on
the lives of our directors or any of our key employees.
We may make strategic acquisitions in the future. We may not
be successful in operating or integrating these acquisitions.
As part of our business strategy, we will consider acquisitions
of, or significant investments in, businesses that offer
products, services and technologies complementary to ours. These
acquisitions could materially adversely affect our operating
results and the price of our common shares. Acquisitions involve
significant risks and uncertainties, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unanticipated costs and liabilities;
|
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in integrating new products, software, businesses,
operations, and technology infrastructure in an efficient and
effective manner;
|
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in maintaining customer relations;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the potential loss of key employees of the acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the diversion of the attention of our senior management from the
operation of our daily business;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the potential adverse effect on our cash position as a result of
all or a portion of an acquisition purchase price being paid in
cash;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the potential issuance of securities that would dilute our
shareholders percentage ownership; and
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the inability to maintain uniform standards, controls, policies
and procedures.
|
Our inability to successfully operate and integrate newly
acquired businesses appropriately, effectively and in a timely
manner could have a material adverse effect on our ability to
take advantage of future growth opportunities and other advances
in technology, as well as on our revenues, gross margins and
expenses.
The costs and risks associated with
Sarbanes-Oxley
regulatory compliance may have a material adverse effect on
us.
We will be required to document and test our internal controls
over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the
United States
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002, so that our management can certify as to the effectiveness
of our internal controls and our independent registered public
accounting firm can render an opinion on managements
assessment and on the effectiveness of our internal controls
over financial reporting commencing with our annual report for
the fiscal year ended April 30, 2008. As a result, we will
be required to improve our financial and managerial controls,
reporting systems and procedures, and we will incur substantial
expenses to test our systems, as well as ongoing compliance
costs. If our management is unable to certify the effectiveness
of our internal controls or if our independent registered public
accounting firm cannot render an opinion on managements
assessment and on the effectiveness of our internal controls
over financial reporting, or if material weaknesses in our
internal controls are identified, we could be subject to
regulatory scrutiny and a loss of public confidence.
Risks Related to an Investment in our Common Shares
Our common share price will fluctuate and you may not be able
to sell your shares at or above the initial public offering
price.
There has been no public market for our common shares. We cannot
predict the extent to which investor interest will lead to the
development of an active and liquid trading market in our common
shares and it is possible that an active and liquid trading
market will not develop or be sustained. The initial public
offering price for our common shares will be negotiated among
us, the selling shareholders and the underwriters and may not be
indicative of the market price of the common shares that will
prevail in the trading market. The market price of our common
shares may decline below the initial public offering price and
you may not be able to sell your shares at or above the initial
offering price. Some companies that have had volatile market
prices for their securities have had securities class action
lawsuits filed against them. If a lawsuit were to be filed
against us, regardless of the outcome, it could result in
substantial costs and a diversion of managements attention
and resources.
The price of our common shares may fluctuate in response to a
number of events, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
our quarterly operating results;
|
|
|
|
|
|
sales of our common shares by principal shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
future announcements concerning our or our competitors
businesses;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the failure of securities analysts to cover our company and/or
changes in financial forecasts and recommendations by securities
analysts;
|
|
|
|
|
|
actions of our competitors;
|
|
|
|
|
|
general market, economic and political conditions; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
natural disasters, terrorist attacks and acts of war.
|
Future sales of a substantial amount of common shares may
depress the price of the common shares.
If our shareholders sell substantial amounts of our common
shares in the public market following this offering, the market
price of our common shares could decline. These sales also might
make it more difficult for us to sell equity or equity related
securities in the future at a time and price that we deem
appropriate. Upon the closing of this offering, we will have
outstanding common shares
(or common
18
shares if the
over-allotment
option
is exercised in full). All of the common shares sold in this
offering will be freely transferable without restriction or
further registration under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as
amended (the U.S. Securities Act). We and most of
our existing shareholders, directors and management have agreed
to a
lock-up,
pursuant to which neither we nor they will sell any shares
without the prior consent of the underwriters for 180 days
after the date of the underwriting agreement, subject to limited
exceptions, and a possible extension of up to 34 additional
days. These shareholders, however, may be released from their
lock-up
agreements with
the agreement of the underwriters at any time and without
notice, which would allow for earlier sales of shares in the
public market. The underwriters have also agreed that certain of
our employees will each have 2,000 shares (subject to
adjustments for stock splits, consolidations or other similar
adjustments) released from their
lock-up
agreements
after 90 days following the date of the underwriting
agreement. We expect
that of
the
remaining outstanding
common shares after this offering will be available for sale in
the public market following the expiration of the applicable
lock-up
period, subject
to certain limitations imposed by applicable U.S. and Canadian
securities laws.
In addition, our articles of incorporation permit us to issue an
unlimited number of common and preferred shares. Substantial
amounts of our common shares are available for issuance subject
to applicable shareholder approval requirements. Our authorized
preferred shares are available for issuance, from time to time,
at the discretion of the board of directors without any further
vote or action by the common shareholders, which would dilute
the percentage ownership held by investors who purchase our
common shares in this offering. Furthermore, our board of
directors has the authority, subject to applicable Canadian
corporate law, to determine the rights, privileges, restrictions
and conditions attaching to any wholly unissued series of
preferred shares, and such rights may be superior to those of
our common shares.
Under the terms of our existing registration rights agreements,
we are required to file a shelf registration statement covering
resales of common shares issuable upon conversion of the
outstanding convertible notes and exercises of warrants held by
our noteholders and to have the registration statement declared
effective under the U.S. Securities Act prior to the expiry of
the
lock-up
agreements.
Consequently, following the expiration of the lock-up period,
our noteholders may exercise their warrants for up to a maximum
of 16,500,000 common shares and sell the underlying common
shares in the public markets. Following the expiration of the
lock-up period, our noteholders may also convert their
convertible notes and sell the underlying common shares in the
public markets. However, we are unable at this time to quantify
the maximum number of common shares issuable upon conversion of
the convertible notes as the conversion ratio depends on the
market price of our common shares following the expiry of the
lock-up
period. See
Description of Convertible Notes Convertible
Notes Conversion. These sales, or the
expectation that these sales may occur, may decrease the market
price for our shares.
In addition, as of September 30, 2006, 19,108,106 common
shares were issuable upon exercise of stock options outstanding
under our stock option and equity incentive plans and an
additional 5,380,197 common shares were reserved for
issuance under our stock option and equity incentive plans.
Subject to the lock-ups described above and limitations imposed
by U.S. and Canadian securities laws on resales, common shares
issued pursuant to exercises of these stock options will be
freely tradeable in the public markets. See Shares
Eligible for Future Sale.
Dr. Terence H. Matthews is a significant shareholder and
he has the potential to exercise significant influence over
matters requiring approval by our shareholders.
Dr. Matthews beneficially
owned %
of our common shares as of September 30, 2006. Based
on common
shares outstanding as of September 30, 2006,
Dr. Matthews will beneficially own
approximately % of our common
shares subsequent to this offering. Dr. Matthews is also
the Chairman of our board of directors. Dr. Matthews, given
the extent of his ownership position, has the potential to
control matters requiring approval by shareholders, including
the election of directors, any amendments to our articles of
incorporation or
by-laws,
and
significant corporate transactions. Dr. Matthews may have
interests that differ from the interests of our other
shareholders.
19
Dr. Matthews ownership of our common shares, as
well as provisions contained in our articles of incorporation
and Canadian law, may reduce the likelihood of a change of
control occurring and, as a consequence, may deprive you of the
opportunity to sell your common shares at a control premium.
The voting power of Dr. Matthews, under certain
circumstances, could have the effect of delaying or preventing a
change of control and may deprive our shareholders of the
opportunity to sell their common shares at a control premium. In
addition, provisions of our articles of incorporation and
Canadian law may delay or impede a change of control
transaction. Our articles of incorporation permit us to issue an
unlimited number of common and preferred shares. Our authorized
preferred shares are available for issuance from time to time at
the discretion of our board of directors, without shareholder
approval. Our board of directors has the authority, subject to
applicable Canadian corporate law, to determine the special
rights and restrictions granted to or imposed on any wholly
unissued series of preferred shares, and these rights, including
voting rights, may be superior to those of our common shares.
Limitations on the ability to acquire and hold our common shares
may be imposed under the
Competition Act
(Canada). This
legislation permits the Commissioner of Competition of Canada to
review any acquisition of or control over a significant interest
in us and grants the Commissioner jurisdiction to challenge such
an acquisition before the Canadian Competition Tribunal on the
basis that it would, or would be likely to, result in a
substantial prevention or lessening of competition in any market
in Canada. In addition, the
Investment Canada Act
subjects an acquisition of control of a Canadian business
(as that term is defined therein) by a
non-Canadian
to
government review if the value of assets acquired as calculated
pursuant to the legislation exceeds a threshold amount. A
reviewable acquisition may not proceed unless the relevant
minister is satisfied that the investment is likely to be a net
benefit to Canada (see Description of Share
Capital Ownership and Exchange Controls). Any
of the foregoing could prevent or delay a change of control and
may deprive our shareholders of the opportunity to sell their
common shares at a control premium.
You may be unable to bring actions or enforce judgments
against us, certain of our directors and officers, certain of
the selling shareholders or our independent public accounting
firm under U.S. federal securities laws.
We are incorporated under the laws of Canada, and our principal
executive offices are located in Canada. A majority of our
directors and officers, certain of the selling shareholders and
our independent public accounting firm reside principally in
Canada and all or a substantial portion of our assets and the
assets of these persons are located outside the United States.
Consequently, it may not be possible for you to effect service
of process within the United States upon us or those persons.
Furthermore, it may not be possible for you to enforce judgments
obtained in U.S. courts based upon the civil liability
provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws or other laws of
the United States against us or those persons. There is doubt as
to the enforceability in original actions in Canadian courts of
liabilities based upon the U.S. federal securities laws, and as
to the enforceability in Canadian courts of judgments of U.S.
courts obtained in actions based upon the civil liability
provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws.
U.S. investors will suffer adverse United States federal
income tax consequences if we are characterized as a passive
foreign investment company.
If, for any taxable year, we are treated as a passive foreign
investment company, or PFIC, as defined under Section 1297
of the Internal Revenue Code, then U.S. Holders (as defined in
United States Federal Income Tax Considerations)
would be subject to adverse United States federal income tax
consequences. Rather than being subject to these adverse tax
consequences, U.S. Holders may be able to make a
mark-to-market
election, which could require the inclusion of amounts in income
of a U.S. Holder annually, even in the absence of distributions
with respect to, or the disposition of, our common shares. We do
not believe that we are a PFIC, nor do we anticipate that we
will become a PFIC in the foreseeable future. However, we cannot
assure you that the Internal Revenue Service will not
successfully challenge our position or that we will not become a
PFIC in a future taxable year, as PFIC status is
re-tested
each year and
depends on our assets and income in such year. For a more
detailed discussion of
20
the PFIC rules, see United States Federal Income Tax
Considerations Passive Foreign Investment Company
Considerations.
You will suffer an immediate and substantial dilution in the
net tangible book value of the common shares you purchase.
The initial public offering price of our common shares is
substantially higher than the pro forma net tangible book value
per share of our outstanding common shares. You will experience
immediate dilution of approximately
$ in
the pro forma net tangible book value per common share from the
price you pay for the common shares. We have a large number of
outstanding options and warrants to purchase common shares with
exercise prices significantly below the estimated public
offering price for the common shares. We also have
$55 million aggregate principal amount of convertible notes
outstanding with conversion prices that may be below the
estimated public offering price for the common shares. To the
extent these securities are exercised, there will be further
dilution. See Dilution.
We will have broad discretion over the use of the net
proceeds from this offering. If we do not use the proceeds
effectively to develop and grow our business, an investment in
our common shares could suffer.
We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering to fund
working capital to assist us in implementing our growth
strategy, particularly in targeting medium to large enterprise
customers who require their communications solutions suppliers
to demonstrate adequate financial resources to address their
communications needs on an ongoing basis; to expand our selling,
marketing and global support capabilities; to increase market
share in our target vertical industry sectors and other
high-growth
market
sectors; to expand our sales and support operations in North
America and selected markets in Latin America, Europe and the
Asia-Pacific
region; to
pursue research and development programs designed to expand our
software applications and product portfolio to further address
the needs of our existing customers and to attract new
customers; and for general corporate purposes, which may include
acquisitions and enhancing our corporate infrastructure to
support our anticipated growth. You will not have the
opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial or other
information on which we base our decisions on how to use the net
proceeds we receive from this offering. We cannot assure you
that management will apply these funds effectively, nor can we
assure you that the net proceeds from this offering will be
invested to yield a favorable return.
21
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Some of the statements under the captions Prospectus
Summary, Risk Factors, Dividend
Policy, Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations,
Business and elsewhere in this prospectus are
forward-looking statements that reflect our current views with
respect to future events and financial performance. Statements
that include the words may, will,
should, could, estimate,
continue, expect, intend,
plan, predict, potential,
believe, project, anticipate
and similar statements of a forward-looking nature, or the
negatives of those statements, identify forward-looking
statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety
of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that
could cause actual events or results to differ from those
expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements,
including, without limitation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to achieve profitability in the future;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the development of the market opportunity for IP-based
communications solutions and related services;
|
|
|
|
|
|
technological developments and evolving industry standards;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our dependence primarily upon one outside contract manufacturer
to manufacture our products;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our dependence on sole source and limited source suppliers for
key components;
|
|
|
|
|
|
delay in the delivery of, or lack of access to, software or
other intellectual property licensed from our suppliers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to protect our intellectual property and our
possible infringement of the intellectual property rights of
third parties;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our reliance on our channel partners for the majority of our
sales;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our solutions may contain design defects, errors, failures or
bugs;
|
|
|
|
|
|
intense competition from our competitors;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our reliance on strategic alliances;
|
|
|
|
|
|
uncertainties arising from our foreign operations; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the fluctuations in our quarterly and annual revenues and
operating results.
|
This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect any
of our forward-looking statements. In evaluating these
statements, you should carefully consider the risks outlined
under Risk Factors. The forward-looking statements
contained in this prospectus are based on the beliefs,
expectations and opinions of management as of the date of this
prospectus. We do not assume any obligation to update
forward-looking statements if circumstances or managements
beliefs, expectations or opinions should change, unless
otherwise required by law. Although we believe that the
expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of
activity, performance or achievements.
22
EXCHANGE RATE INFORMATION
The following table sets forth, for each period indicated, the
high and low exchange rates for Canadian dollars expressed in
U.S. dollars, the average of such exchange rates on the last day
of each month during such period, and the exchange rate at the
end of such period. These rates are based on the inverse noon
buying rate in The City of New York for cable transfers in
Canadian dollars as certified for customs purposes by the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Days
|
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 28,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
April 28,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate at the end of period
|
|
|
0.6397
|
|
|
|
0.6880
|
|
|
|
0.7314
|
|
|
|
0.8102
|
|
|
|
0.7957
|
|
|
|
0.8926
|
|
|
Average rate during period
|
|
|
0.6382
|
|
|
|
0.6491
|
|
|
|
0.7436
|
|
|
|
0.7866
|
|
|
|
0.8016
|
|
|
|
0.8429
|
|
|
Highest rate during period
|
|
|
0.6622
|
|
|
|
0.6909
|
|
|
|
0.7880
|
|
|
|
0.8493
|
|
|
|
0.8083
|
|
|
|
0.8926
|
|
|
Lowest rate during period
|
|
|
0.6200
|
|
|
|
0.6264
|
|
|
|
0.6895
|
|
|
|
0.7158
|
|
|
|
0.7957
|
|
|
|
0.7872
|
|
On November 7, 2006, the inverse of the noon buying rate
was C$1.00 per US$0.8868.
USE OF PROCEEDS
We estimate that we will receive net proceeds of
$ million
from the sale of
the common
shares offered by us in this offering, based upon an assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per
share, after deducting estimated underwriting commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us. We will not receive
any proceeds from the sale of common shares being offered by the
selling shareholders. We intend to use the net proceeds of this
offering as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to fund working capital to assist us in implementing our growth
strategy, particularly in targeting large enterprise customers
who require their communications solutions suppliers to
demonstrate adequate financial resources to address their
communications needs on an ongoing basis;
|
|
|
|
|
|
to expand our selling, marketing and global support capabilities
through the development of direct marketing and brand awareness
programs, the recruitment of new channel partners, the opening
of new customer demonstration centers and the recruitment of
further sales staff;
|
|
|
|
|
|
to pursue research and development programs designed to expand
our software applications and product portfolio and to enter
into new, or expand our existing, strategic alliances and
partnerships to further address the needs of our existing
customers and to attract new customers; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
for general corporate purposes, which may include acquisitions.
|
If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional
common shares in full, we estimate that the net proceeds to us
from the sale of the additional common shares to be sold by us
will be
$ million,
all of which will be used for general corporate purposes.
While we currently anticipate that we will use the net proceeds
of this offering as described above, we may re-allocate the net
proceeds from time to time depending upon market and other
conditions in effect at the time. Although we regularly evaluate
potential acquisition and investment opportunities, we have no
current arrangements or commitments with respect to any
particular transaction. In addition, to the extent the net
proceeds of this offering are greater or less than the estimated
amount, because either the offering does not price at the
midpoint of the estimated price range or the size of the
offering changes, the difference will increase or decrease the
amount of net proceeds available for general corporate purposes.
Pending their application, we intend to invest the net proceeds
in short-term, interest-bearing, investment grade securities.
23
DIVIDEND POLICY
We currently intend to retain any future earnings to fund the
development and growth of our business and we do not currently
anticipate paying dividends on our common shares. Any
determination to pay dividends to holders of our common shares
in the future will be at the discretion of our board of
directors and will depend on many factors, including our
financial condition, earnings, legal requirements and other
factors as the board of directors deems relevant. In addition,
our outstanding convertible notes limit our ability to pay
dividends and we may in the future become subject to debt
instruments or other agreements that further limit our ability
to pay dividends.
24
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and
capitalization as of April 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
on an actual basis;
|
|
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma basis to give effect to the conversion of all of
our outstanding preferred shares into common shares, the
exercise of the warrants held by a financing agent and the
warrants issued in connection with our Series A Preferred
Shares and the creation of a new class of preferred shares,
issuable in series, all of which will occur prior to or in
connection with the completion of this offering; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma basis as adjusted to give effect to the receipt
of approximately
$ million
in estimated net proceeds from this offering, after deducting
estimated underwriting commissions and estimated offering
expenses payable by us, and the application of these proceeds as
described under Use of Proceeds.
|
The table should be read in conjunction with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated
financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As at April 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
as Adjusted
(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
35.7
|
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt, including capital leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible notes
|
|
$
|
48.7
|
|
|
$
|
48.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital leases
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable shares and derivative instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable common
shares
(1)
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A Preferred
Shares
(2)
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series B Preferred
Shares
(3)
|
|
|
36.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments
(4)
|
|
|
75.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders deficiency
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
shares
(5)
|
|
$
|
188.8
|
|
|
$
|
285.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New preferred
shares
(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants
(7)
|
|
|
47.9
|
|
|
|
46.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(355.5
|
)
|
|
|
(304.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(49.7
|
)
|
|
|
(49.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(168.6
|
)
|
|
|
(22.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$
|
24.3
|
|
|
$
|
30.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
The holder of 10,000,000 common shares has the right to require
us to redeem these common shares by virtue of a shareholders
agreement dated April 23, 2004, as amended, among certain
of our shareholders and us. This right terminates upon the
completion of this offering.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Unlimited shares authorized, 20,000,000 issued and outstanding,
actual; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding,
pro forma and pro forma as adjusted. The Series A
Preferred Shares will be converted in accordance with their
terms into common shares in connection with the completion of
this offering.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Unlimited shares authorized, 67,789,300 issued and outstanding,
actual; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding,
pro forma and pro forma as adjusted. The Series B
Preferred Shares will be converted in accordance with their
terms into common shares in connection with the completion of
this offering.
|
25
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
The derivative instruments arose because a portion of the
redemption price of the Series A Preferred Shares and
Series B Preferred Shares is indexed to our common share
price and as required by SFAS 133 has been bifurcated and
accounted for separately. The Series A Preferred Shares and
the Series B Preferred Shares will be converted in
accordance with their terms into common shares in connection
with the completion of this offering. As a result of this
conversion the derivative instruments balance will
be reclassified into equity.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
Unlimited shares authorized, 107,302,322 issued and outstanding,
actual; unlimited shares
authorized, shares
issued and outstanding, pro forma; unlimited shares
authorized, shares
issued and outstanding, pro forma as adjusted.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
No shares authorized, issued and outstanding, actual; unlimited
shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding, pro forma
and pro forma as adjusted.
|
|
|
|
(7)
|
The average weighted exercise price of the warrants is $0.57.
|
|
|
|
(8)
|
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per share
would increase (decrease) pro forma as adjusted cash and
cash equivalents and total shareholders deficiency by
$ million,
(i) assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set
forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and
(ii) after deducting estimated underwriting commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
|
The table above does not include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,668,538 common shares issuable upon the exercise of stock
options outstanding under our stock option plan at a weighted
average exercise price of $1.06 per share, as of
April 30, 2006;
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,234,331 additional common shares reserved for issuance under
our stock option plan, as of April 30, 2006;
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,785,410 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants by Technology Partnerships Canada as of
April 30, 2006, which are exercisable for common shares
without the payment of any additional cash consideration;
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,500,000 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants held by holders of the convertible notes at
an exercise price calculated in accordance with a formula based
on the market price of our common shares (see Description
of Convertible Notes Noteholder Warrants); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a number of common shares issuable upon the conversion of
outstanding convertible notes determined by dividing the
outstanding principal and accrued interest owing on each note by
a conversion price calculated in accordance with a formula based
on the market price of our common shares (see Description
of Convertible Notes Convertible Notes).
|
26
DILUTION
If you invest in our common shares, your interest will be
immediately diluted to the extent of the difference between the
price per common share paid by you in this offering and the pro
forma net tangible book value per common share after the
offering. Pro forma net tangible book value per common share is
determined at any date by subtracting our total liabilities from
our total tangible assets and dividing the difference by the
number of common shares outstanding at that date, after giving
effect to the conversion of all of our outstanding preferred
shares into common shares and the exercise of the warrants held
by a financing agent, warrants issued to Wesley Clover and
warrants issued in connection with our Series A Preferred
Shares, all of which will occur prior to or in connection with
the completion of this offering.
Our pro forma net tangible book value as
of was
approximately
$ million,
or
$ per
common share. After giving effect to this offering, based on an
assumed initial public offering price of
$ per
common share and after deducting estimated underwriting
commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us, our
pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of
April 30, 2006 would have been approximately
$ million,
or
$ per
common share. This represents an immediate increase in pro forma
net tangible book value of
$ per
common share to our existing shareholders and an immediate
dilution of
$ per
common share to new investors purchasing common shares in this
offering.
The following table illustrates this substantial and immediate
dilution to new investors on a per share basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed initial public offering price per common share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value per share as of April 30,
2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in pro forma net tangible book value per share
attributable to new investors in this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of
April 30, 2006 after giving effect to this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution in pro forma net tangible book value per share to new
investors in this offering
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional
common shares in this offering in full, our as adjusted pro
forma net tangible book value at April 30, 2006 would be
$ ,
or
$ per
common share, representing an immediate increase in pro forma
net tangible book value to our existing shareholders of
$ per
common share and an immediate dilution to new investors of
$ per
common share.
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share would increase (decrease) our pro forma as adjusted
net tangible book value after giving effect to this offering by
$ per
share and the dilution in pro forma net tangible book value per
share to new investors by
$ per
share, (i) assuming the number of shares offered by us, as
set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same
and (ii) after deducting the estimated underwriting
commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us.
The following table sets forth as of April 30, 2006 on the
same pro forma basis described above:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the total number of common shares owned by existing shareholders
and to be owned by new investors purchasing common shares in
this offering;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the total consideration paid by our existing shareholders and to
be paid by new investors purchasing common shares in this
offering; and
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the average price per common share paid by existing shareholders
and to be paid by new investors purchasing common shares in this
offering:
|
The table includes the impact of the following items:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,668,538 common shares issuable upon the exercise of stock
options outstanding under our stock option plan at a weighted
average exercise price of $1.06 per share, as of April 30,
2006;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,234,331 additional common shares reserved for issuance under
our stock option plan, as of April 30, 2006;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,785,410 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants by Technology Partnerships Canada as of
April 30, 2006, which are exercisable for common shares
without the payment of any additional cash consideration;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,500,000 common shares issuable upon the exercise of
outstanding warrants held by holders of the convertible notes at
the minimum exercise price
of .
The actual exercise price will be calculated in accordance with
a formula based on the market price of our common shares (see
Description of Convertible Notes Noteholder
Warrants);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
common shares issuable upon the conversion of outstanding
convertible notes at the minimum conversion price
of .
The actual conversion price will be determined by dividing the
outstanding principal and accrued interest owing on each note by
a conversion price calculated in accordance with a formula based
on the market price of our common shares (see Description
of Convertible Notes Convertible Notes); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
common shares issuable upon the exercise of outstanding warrants
held by Wesley Clover.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
Total Consideration
|
|
|
Average Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Common
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters over-allotment option is exercised in
full, the number of common shares held by the new investors will
increase
to ,
or %
of the total common shares outstanding after this offering.
A $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed initial public
offering price of
$ per
share would increase (decrease) total consideration paid by
new investors, total consideration paid by all shareholders and
average price per common share paid by all shareholders by
$ million,
$ million
and
$ ,
respectively, (i) assuming the number of shares offered by
us, as set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains
the same and (ii) after deducting the estimated
underwriting commissions and estimated offering expenses payable
by us.
28
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following sets forth selected consolidated financial
information derived from (a) our audited consolidated
financial statements as of and for the fiscal years ended
April 25, 2004, April 24, 2005, and April 30,
2006 which are included elsewhere in this prospectus,
(b) our audited consolidated financial statements as of and
for the fiscal year ended April 28, 2002 and April 27,
2003, which are not included in this prospectus, and
(c) our audited consolidated financial statements as of and
for the
six-day
transition period ended April 30, 2005, which are included
elsewhere in this prospectus. The unaudited interim consolidated
financial statements include all normal recurring adjustments
that we consider necessary for a fair presentation of our
financial position and results of operations. The data set out
below does not take into account the conversion of our
outstanding preferred shares into common shares, the exercise of
the warrants held by a financing agent or the exercise of the
warrants issued in connection with our Series A Preferred
Shares. On April 24, 2005, we changed our fiscal year end
from the last Sunday in April to April 30. The change in
our fiscal year end (and resulting alignment of fiscal
quarter ends) permits us to better align our reporting
results with industry norms. Our consolidated financial
statements are reported in U.S. dollars and have been prepared
in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting
principles, or U.S. GAAP.
Historical results do not necessarily indicate results expected
for any future period. You should read the following selected
consolidated financial data together with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations, and our consolidated
financial statements and the accompanying notes included
elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Days
|
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 28,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
358.0
|
|
|
$
|
352.2
|
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
215.5
|
|
|
|
225.4
|
|
|
|
202.9
|
|
|
|
213.2
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
225.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
142.5
|
|
|
|
126.8
|
|
|
|
137.8
|
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
161.4
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
59.1
|
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
36.2
|
|
|
|
41.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
141.9
|
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
111.4
|
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
120.7
|
|
|
Special
charges
(1)
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on disposal of assets
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.4
|
)
|
|
Amortization of acquired
intangibles
(2)
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(111.2
|
)
|
|
|
(72.1
|
)
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
(41.3
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
39.8
|
|
|
Income tax (recovery) expense
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(114.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(70.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(44.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(1.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.63
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.26
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.49
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.44
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding
|
|
|
106,848,314
|
|
|
|
113,109,751
|
|
|
|
127,831,211
|
|
|
|
113,792,829
|
|
|
|
117,149,933
|
|
|
|
117,230,198
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and to realign our business.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Acquired intangible assets relating to the acquisition of the
Mitel name, certain assets and subsidiaries from Zarlink
Semiconductor Inc. in 2001 were fully amortized in 2004.
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
As at
|
|
|
|
|
April 28,
|
|
|
April 27,
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
3.6
|
|
|
$
|
22.3
|
|
|
$
|
26.7
|
|
|
$
|
9.7
|
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
$
|
35.7
|
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
132.4
|
|
|
|
120.6
|
|
|
|
115.0
|
|
|
|
117.5
|
|
|
|
115.8
|
|
|
|
130.8
|
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
29.7
|
|
|
|
25.3
|
|
|
|
20.3
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
20.6
|
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
208.1
|
|
|
$
|
175.5
|
|
|
$
|
169.4
|
|
|
$
|
156.6
|
|
|
$
|
195.3
|
|
|
$
|
199.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
$
|
138.9
|
|
|
$
|
135.8
|
|
|
$
|
103.2
|
|
|
$
|
115.8
|
|
|
$
|
101.9
|
|
|
$
|
126.0
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
|
|
23.1
|
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
20.2
|
|
|
|
66.7
|
|
|
|
56.7
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29.2
|
|
|
|
38.0
|
|
|
|
37.4
|
|
|
|
75.9
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
|
|
24.8
|
|
|
|
25.4
|
|
|
|
25.1
|
|
|
|
45.6
|
|
|
Redeemable
shares
(4)
|
|
|
27.9
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
51.3
|
|
|
|
57.2
|
|
|
|
57.3
|
|
|
|
64.2
|
|
|
Capital stock
|
|
|
167.5
|
|
|
|
183.4
|
|
|
|
184.8
|
|
|
|
187.6
|
|
|
|
187.6
|
|
|
|
188.8
|
|
|
Other capital accounts
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
23.3
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(147.0
|
)
|
|
|
(218.2
|
)
|
|
|
(247.1
|
)
|
|
|
(302.3
|
)
|
|
|
(304.0
|
)
|
|
|
(355.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
208.1
|
|
|
$
|
175.5
|
|
|
$
|
169.4
|
|
|
$
|
156.6
|
|
|
$
|
195.3
|
|
|
$
|
199.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
The derivative instruments arose as a portion of the redemption
price of the Series A Preferred Shares and Series B
Preferred Shares is indexed to our common share price and as
required by SFAS 133 has been bifurcated and accounted for
separately.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Redeemable shares include 10,000,000 common shares (which are
redeemable by virtue of a shareholders agreement dated
April 23, 2004, as amended, among certain of our
shareholders and us), 20,000,000 Series A Preferred Shares
and 67,789,300 Series B Preferred Shares.
|
30
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with
our consolidated financial statements and the notes to those
statements, as well as the other financial information appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus. This prospectus contains
forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties
and that reflect estimates and assumptions. Our actual results
may differ materially from those indicated in forward-looking
statements. Factors that could cause our actual results to
differ materially from our forward-looking statements are
described in Risk Factors and elsewhere in this
prospectus.
Overview
We are a provider of integrated communications solutions and
services for business customers. Our solutions include products
such as platforms, desktop appliances and software applications.
We complement our communications solutions with a range of
services including maintenance and support, managed services,
installation and other professional services. Our
IP-based
communications
solutions integrate voice, video and data communications with
business applications and processes. We believe that these
solutions enable our customers to realize significant cost
benefits and to conduct their business more efficiently and
effectively.
We were incorporated in Canada on January 12, 2001 by
Zarlink Semiconductor Inc. (Zarlink) (formerly Mitel
Corporation) in order to reorganize its communications systems
division in contemplation of the sale of that business to
companies controlled by Dr. Matthews. In a series of
related transactions on February 16, 2001 and
March 27, 2001, we acquired from Zarlink the
Mitel name and substantially all of the assets
(other than Canadian real estate and most intellectual property
assets) and subsidiaries of the Zarlink communications systems
business.
Over the past five years, we have strategically invested in the
research and development of
IP-based
communications
solutions to take advantage of the telephone communications
industry shift from legacy digital telephony technology to new
IP-based
platforms,
desktop devices and software applications. We have realigned our
business to discontinue certain activities relating to our
legacy solutions and to focus our sales and marketing efforts on
our
IP-based
communications solutions. We have also undertaken certain
non-recurring
cost
reduction measures, including staff reductions, to align our
operating expense model with current revenue levels while we
focused on developing a broad portfolio of
IP-based
communications
solutions. As a result of the strategic investment in the
research and development of
IP-based
communications
solutions and efforts to realign our business to discontinue
certain activities relating to our legacy systems and to focus
our efforts on our IP-based communications solutions, we have
incurred losses in each of the past five fiscal years, including
net losses of $44.6 million in fiscal 2006 and
$49.6 million in fiscal 2005.
Notwithstanding our history of net losses, we believe that we
are well positioned to improve our financial position as many of
the cost reduction measures we have undertaken were incurred in
connection with our migration to IP-based communications
solutions and are therefore non-recurring. Additionally, we
believe that our early and sustained investment in IP-based
research and development, and our decision to concentrate our
efforts on this new technology, have positioned us to take
advantage of the industry shift to IP-based communications
solutions, as businesses migrate from their legacy systems. This
is evidenced by a 48% increase in IP-based product revenues in
fiscal 2006 compared with fiscal 2005 and 97% of our system
shipments for the quarter ended April 30, 2006 being
IP-based communications solutions.
Comparability of
Periods
On April 24, 2005, we changed our fiscal year end from the
last Sunday in April to April 30 in each year. The selection of
the last Sunday in April as our fiscal year end typically
resulted in a fifty-two week year with four thirteen week
quarters. The change in the fiscal year end allows us to better
align our reporting results with those of our industry peers.
Results for the six-day transition period (the Transition
Period) from April 25, 2005 to April 30, 2005
have been included in this discussion and analysis;
31
however, it would not be meaningful to extrapolate this six-day
period to forecast quarterly or annual operating results. In
light of our realignment of our business over the past five
years to focus on
IP-based
communications
solutions, we believe that
period-over-period
comparisons of our operating results are not necessarily
meaningful and should not be relied upon as being a good
indicator of our future performance.
Effective fiscal 2006, we changed our structure of reporting so
that the reportable segments are now represented by the
following four geographic areas: the United States; Canada and
Caribbean & Latin America (CALA); Europe, Middle East &
Africa (EMEA); and Asia-Pacific. These reportable segments were
determined in accordance with how management views and evaluates
our business. In previous years, we reported our operations in
two segments: the Communications Solutions segment
(Solutions) and the Customer Services segment
(Services). The results of operations for 2005 and
2004 have been restated to conform with the new presentation.
Key Performance Indicators
Key performance indicators that we use to manage our business
and evaluate our financial results and operating performance
include: revenues, gross margins, operating costs and cash flows.
Revenue performance is evaluated from both a geographical
perspective, in accordance with our reportable segments, and
from a revenue source perspective, that is product revenues and
service revenues. We evaluate revenue performance by comparing
the results to management forecasts and prior period performance.
Gross margins and operating costs are evaluated in similar
manners as actual performance is measured against both
management forecasts and prior period performance.
Cash flow from operations is the key performance indicator with
respect to cash flows. As part of monitoring cash flow from
operations, we also monitor our ability to collect accounts
receivable by measuring our days sales outstanding.
In addition to the above indicators, from time to time, we also
monitor performance in the following areas: status with our key
customers on a global basis; the achievement of expected
milestones of our key R&D projects; and the achievement of
our key strategic initiatives. In an effort to ensure we are
creating value for our customers and maintaining strong
relationships with those customers, we monitor the status of key
customer contracts and conduct regular customer satisfaction
surveys to monitor customer service levels. With respect to our
R&D projects, we measure content, quality and timeliness
against project plans.
Sources of Revenues and Expenses
The following describes our sources of revenues and expenses.
Revenues
We generate our revenues principally from the sale of integrated
communications solutions and services to business customers with
these revenues being classified as product or service revenues.
Product revenues are comprised of revenues generated from the
sales of platforms and desktop devices, software applications
and other product-related revenues, while service revenues are
primarily comprised of revenues from maintenance and support,
managed services, installation and other professional services.
We sell our communications solutions and services through a
distribution network of channel partners that includes wholesale
distributors, solutions providers, authorized resellers,
communications service providers, systems integrators, and other
technology providers. We complement and support our channel
partners in selected markets using a sales model whereby our
sales staff works either directly with a prospective customer,
or in coordination with a channel partner in defining the scope,
design and implementation of the solution.
Software revenues are recognized when persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists, delivery has occurred in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the contract, the fee is fixed or
determinable, and
32
collection is reasonably assured. For software arrangements
involving multiple elements, revenues are allocated to each
element based on the relative fair value or the residual method,
as applicable, and using vendor specific objective evidence of
fair values, which is based on prices charged when the element
is sold separately. Revenues related to post-contract support,
including technical support and unspecified when-and-if
available software upgrades, is recognized ratably over the
post-contract
support
term for contracts that are greater than one year. For contracts
where the
post-contract
support period is one year or less, the costs are deemed
insignificant, and the unspecified software upgrades are
expected to be and historically have been infrequent, revenues
are recognized together with the initial licensing fee and the
estimated costs are accrued.
We make sales to distributors and resellers based on contracts
with terms typically ranging from one to three years. For
products sold through these distribution channels, revenues are
recognized at the time the risk of loss is transferred to
distributors and resellers according to contractual terms and if
all contractual obligations have been satisfied. These
arrangements usually involve multiple elements, including
post-contract technical support and training. Costs related to
insignificant technical support obligations, including
second-line telephone support for certain products, are accrued.
For other technical support and training obligations, revenues
from product sales are allocated to each element based on vendor
specific objective evidence of relative fair values, generally
representing the prices charged when the element is sold
separately, with any discount allocated proportionately.
Revenues attributable to undelivered elements are deferred and
recognized upon performance or ratably over the contract period.
Our standard warranty period extends fifteen months from the
date of sale and extended warranty periods are offered on
certain products. At the time product revenues are recognized,
an accrual for estimated warranty costs is recorded as a
component of cost of revenues based on prior claims experience.
Sales to our resellers do not provide for return or price
protection rights while sales to distributors provide for these
rights. Product return rights are typically limited to a
percentage of sales over a maximum three-month period. A reserve
for estimated product returns and price protection rights based
on past experience is recorded as a reduction of sales at the
time product revenues are recognized. For new distributors, we
estimate the product return provision using past return
experience with similar distribution partners operating in the
same regions. We offer various cooperative marketing programs to
assist our distribution channels to market our products.
Allowances for these programs are recorded as marketing expenses
at the time of shipment based on contract terms and prior claims
experience.
We also sell products, including installation and related
maintenance and support services, directly to
end-user
customers. For
products sold directly to
end-user
customers,
revenues are recognized at the time of delivery and at the time
risk of loss is transferred, based on prior experience of
successful compliance with customer specifications. Revenues
from installation are recognized when services are rendered and
when contractual obligations, including customer acceptance,
have been satisfied. Revenues are also derived from professional
service contracts with terms that typically range from two to
six weeks for standard solutions and for longer periods for
customized solutions. Revenues from customer support,
professional services and maintenance contracts are recognized
ratably over the contractual period, generally one year.
Billings in advance of services are included in deferred
revenues. Revenues from installation services provided in
advance of billing are included in unbilled accounts receivable.
Certain arrangements with
end-user
customers
provide for free customer support and maintenance services
extending twelve months from the date of installation. Customer
support and maintenance contracts are also sold separately. When
customer support or maintenance services are provided free of
charge, these amounts are unbundled from the product and
installation revenues at their fair market value based on the
prices charged when the element is sold separately and
recognized ratably over the contract period. Consulting and
training revenues are recognized upon performance.
We provide long-term system management services of communication
systems (Managed Services). Under these
arrangements, Managed Services and communication equipment are
provided to
end-user
customers for terms that typically range from one to ten years.
Revenues from Managed Services are recognized ratably over the
contract period. We retain title and risk of loss associated
with the
33
equipment utilized in the provision of the Managed Services.
Accordingly, the equipment is capitalized as part of property
and equipment and is amortized to cost of sales over the
contract period.
Cost of Revenues
Cost of revenues is comprised of product costs and service
costs. Product cost of revenues consists of cost of goods
purchased from
third-party
electronics
manufacturing services, or EMS suppliers, inventory provisions,
engineering costs, warranty costs and other supply chain
management costs.
We outsource most of our worldwide manufacturing and repair
operations to BreconRidge. In addition to BreconRidge, we
outsource the manufacturing of a number of our
IP-based
platforms to
Plexus Corp. of the United States and certain desktop sets to
WKK Technology Ltd. in China. The manufacturing of our products
has been allocated among these key suppliers to reduce the risks
associated with using a single supply source. See Risk
Factors Because we depend primarily upon one outside
contract manufacturer to manufacture our products, our
operations could be delayed or interrupted if we encounter
problems with this contractor. We retain Lytica Inc., an
independent contract manufacturing consultancy, to assist us in
attempting to confirm, on a quarterly basis, that pricing from
BreconRidge, Plexus Corp. and WKK Technology Ltd. is at
market rates and the level of service obtained from them is
comparable to their competitors.
Service cost of sales is primarily comprised of labor costs
associated with maintenance and support, Managed Services,
installation and other professional services.
Research and Development
Expenses
Our product development programs are focused on developing
IP-based
communications
solutions. Our research and development organization is based in
Ottawa, Canada and comprises over 300 personnel, almost all of
whom are engaged in IP product design and verification. We also
leverage outsourced development relationships with a number of
third party software development firms, for non-mission-critical
development and support.
Research and development expenses consist primarily of salaries
and related expenses for engineering personnel, materials and
consumables and subcontract service costs.
Sales, General and
Administrative Expenses
Sales, general and administrative, or SG&A, expenses consist
primarily of costs relating to our sales and marketing
activities, including salaries and related expenses,
advertising, trade shows and other promotional activities and
materials, administrative and financing functions, legal and
professional fees, insurance and other corporate and overhead
expenses.
Special Charges
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and to realign our business to focus on
IP-based
communications
solutions. Special charges consist primarily of workforce
reduction costs, lease termination obligations, assets
write-offs and legal costs. We reassess the accruals on a
regular basis to reflect changes in the timing or amount of
estimated restructuring and termination costs on which the
original estimates were based. New restructuring accruals or
reversals of previous accruals are recorded in the period of
change.
Other Operating
Expenses
Other expenses included as deductions against operating income
include gains or losses on sale of assets or operations and
amortization of acquired intangibles. Acquired intangible assets
were fully amortized in early fiscal 2004.
34
Results of Operations
Fiscal 2006 as compared to
Fiscal 2005
The following table sets forth our comparative results of
operations, both in dollars and as a percentage of total
revenues, for fiscal 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
44.9
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
213.2
|
|
|
|
62.3
|
|
|
|
225.7
|
|
|
|
58.3
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
37.7
|
|
|
|
161.4
|
|
|
|
41.7
|
|
|
|
32.4
|
|
|
|
25.1
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
41.4
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
44.1
|
|
|
|
11.4
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
33.6
|
|
|
|
120.7
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
Special
charges
(1)
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
(4.9
|
)
|
|
|
(46.2
|
)
|
|
Loss (gain) on sale of manufacturing operations
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(4.3
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(41.3
|
)
|
|
|
(12.1
|
)
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
34.6
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
192.3
|
|
|
Mark-to-market adjustment on derivatives
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
27.3
|
|
|
|
515.1
|
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
|
(14.5
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(44.6
|
)
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)%
|
|
$
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
(10.1
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* the comparison is not meaningful
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and realign our business.
|
35
Revenues:
Geographic Segment Revenues:
Our reportable segments are represented by the following four
geographic sales regions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the United States;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA);
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada and Caribbean & Latin America (CALA); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia-Pacific.
|
These reportable segments were determined in accordance with how
our management views and evaluates our business. The following
table sets forth total revenues by geographic regions, both in
dollars and as a percentage of total revenues, for the fiscal
years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
153.5
|
|
|
|
44.9
|
%
|
|
$
|
178.5
|
|
|
|
46.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
%
|
|
EMEA
|
|
|
145.5
|
|
|
|
42.5
|
|
|
|
156.3
|
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
Canada and CALA
|
|
|
37.2
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
|
Asia-Pacific
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
45.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
44.9
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During fiscal 2006 revenues grew by $44.9 million, or
13.1%, compared to fiscal 2005.
We have experienced revenue growth for the fiscal year ended
April 30, 2006 across all geographical segments, with the
most significant growth, in absolute dollars, coming from the
United States and EMEA.
Revenue growth in the United States is primarily attributable to
increased product sales through both the regions channel
partners and direct sales offices. In addition, the region has
enjoyed significant growth in its service revenues primarily due
to increased installation services that are directly associated
with the growth in product sales through our direct sales.
Revenue growth in EMEA is primarily attributable to increased
product sales through the regions channel partners,
specifically in the United Kingdom and Continental Europe.
However, revenue growth in the region has been partially
mitigated by a significant year-over-year decline in the
regions services business resulting from a decline in both
maintenance and support and Managed Service revenues. We
anticipate that our service revenues in the region will continue
to decline in the future due to increased market competition on
both maintenance and support and Managed Service contract
renewals.
The overall growth in global product sales as well as the
decline in maintenance and support and Managed Service revenues
is addressed in greater detail below.
We expect that we will continue to see greater than 80% of our
global revenues generated through the United States and EMEA
operating segments for the foreseeable future.
36
The following table sets forth total revenues for groups of
similar products and services, both in dollars and as a
percentage of total revenues, for the fiscal years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Products:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Platforms and desktop devices
|
|
$
|
165.1
|
|
|
|
48.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
204.3
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
39.2
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
|
|
Software applications
|
|
|
23.5
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
34.2
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
|
|
45.5
|
|
|
|
Other
(1)
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
22.0
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
207.7
|
|
|
|
60.7
|
|
|
|
260.5
|
|
|
|
67.3
|
|
|
|
52.8
|
|
|
|
25.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance and support
|
|
|
85.3
|
|
|
|
24.9
|
|
|
|
80.9
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)
|
|
|
Installation
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
|
|
Managed services
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(15.6
|
)
|
|
|
Professional and other services
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
(4.3
|
)
|
|
|
(26.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134.5
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
|
|
126.6
|
|
|
|
32.7
|
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
44.9
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Other products include mainly OEM products representing
approximately 5.5% of total revenues in both the fiscal year
ended April 24, 2005 and the fiscal year ended
April 30, 2006.
|
Product Revenues:
Revenues from product sales were $260.5 million in the
fiscal year ended April 30, 2006 compared to
$207.7 million in fiscal 2005, representing an increase of
25.4%.
Revenues generated by sales of our communications platforms and
desktop devices increased by $39.2 million or 23.7% on a
year-over-year basis. During fiscal 2006 sales of IP-based
communication platforms and desktop devices increased by 45%, or
approximately $55.0 million, compared to fiscal 2005.
Consistent with recent periods, we continued to experience a
decrease in sales of our legacy communication platforms and
desktop devices. The overall growth in communications platforms
and desktop devices revenues has been driven primarily by
increased shipments of platforms and desktop devices during
fiscal 2006. While we have experienced some pricing adjustments
on communication platforms and desktop devices compared to
fiscal 2005, pricing changes have not had a significant impact
on the revenue growth over fiscal 2005.
In addition to the growth in IP communication platforms and
desktop devices, we also experienced significant year-over-year
growth in software applications revenues, with software
applications revenues growing by $10.7 million or 45.5% in
fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005. IP-based software
applications represented over 80% of total software applications
revenues for fiscal 2006, an increase from approximately 68% in
fiscal 2005, and revenues from IP-based software applications
increased in excess of 70% in comparison to fiscal 2005. The
growth in IP-based software applications revenues reflects
(i) a year-over-year increase in the rate of attachment of
software applications to the underlying platforms and desktop
devices and (ii) approximately $1.0 million of revenue
resulting from the sale of IP applications introduced during
fiscal 2006. Other product revenues, which include mainly
original equipment manufacturer products that we re-sell,
remained relatively consistent as a percentage of sales in
fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005.
Overall
IP-based
product revenues represented 86% of total product revenue for
fiscal 2006, an increase from 73% in fiscal 2005.
37
We anticipate that any future product revenue growth will be
primarily attributable to increased revenues from our IP-based
communication platforms, desktop devices and software
applications, offset by continued declines in legacy
communications platforms and desktop devices.
Service Revenues:
Revenue from services sales was 32.7% of total revenues during
fiscal 2006, representing a decrease from 39.3% of total
revenues for fiscal 2005. This decrease is primarily
attributable to a decline in maintenance and support revenues of
$4.4 million, a decline in professional and other service
revenues of $4.3 million and a decline in revenues from
Managed Services contracts of $1.7 million.
The decline in maintenance and support revenues and revenues
from Managed Services contracts is due primarily to the decline
in revenue from the EMEA region due to increased market
competition. In fiscal 2006, maintenance and support revenues
and revenues from Managed Service contracts declined by
approximately $7.0 million over fiscal 2005 levels in the EMEA
region. We estimate that 70% of this decline was due to
contracts that were not renewed due to market competition, while
the rest of the decline is attributable to lower pricing on
services due to competitive market pressures.
The decline in professional and other services revenue was
driven primarily by a $3.0 million decrease in revenue as a
result of the sale of Edict Training Ltd., an 80% owned
subsidiary, during fiscal 2006.
The overall decline in service revenues was partially mitigated
by an increase in installation service revenues of
$2.5 million which is primarily attributable to increased
product sales via our direct sales offices in the
United States.
We continue to generate more than 60% of our total service
revenues from the provision of fixed maintenance contracts.
Although we expect this level to continue, increased market
competition on the renewal of these maintenance contracts may
result in lower maintenance revenues and hence lower service
revenues in future periods.
Gross Margin:
The following table sets forth gross margin, both in dollars and
as a percentage of revenues, for the fiscal years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
207.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
260.5
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
75.7
|
|
|
|
36.4
|
%
|
|
|
111.4
|
|
|
|
42.8
|
%
|
|
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
134.5
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
126.6
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
53.3
|
|
|
|
39.6
|
%
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
39.5
|
%
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
387.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
37.7
|
%
|
|
|
161.4
|
|
|
|
41.7
|
%
|
Gross margin improved to 41.7% of revenues for fiscal 2006
compared to 37.7% for fiscal 2005.
Products gross margin as a percentage of revenues increased from
36.4% in fiscal 2005 to 42.8% in fiscal 2006. The increase in
margin is primarily due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a 1.3% improvement as a result of (i) a shift in
communication platform sales mix whereby total communication
platform sales contained a higher proportion of higher margin
large enterprise business platforms in fiscal 2006 versus fiscal
2005; (ii) an improved mix of software applications
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
revenues as a total of product revenues as software applications
typically generate higher margins than either communication
platforms and desktop appliances or other product revenues; and
(iii) cost reductions on communications platforms and
desktop appliances resulting from product
re-design
efforts and
improved costs from electronic contract manufacturers; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a 0.4% improvement as a result of lower inventory obsolescence
provisions recorded in fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005 due
to the end of life of our
Mitel 3100 ICP
product in
the third quarter of fiscal 2005.
|
Our margins may vary from period to period depending upon
region, distribution channel and product mix. We anticipate that
cost reductions resulting from re-design efforts and improved
manufacturing costs of our IP-based communications platforms and
desktop appliances will have a positive effect on product gross
margin in fiscal 2007. In addition, as we evolve our business
towards a higher proportion of software license and software
maintenance revenues, we expect that product gross margins will
also be favorably impacted, although we are not anticipating a
significant amount of software maintenance revenue in fiscal
2007.
Service margins declined marginally to 39.5% in fiscal 2006 from
39.6% in fiscal 2005. The slight decrease in service margins was
due primarily to the change in mix of service revenues, as total
service revenues contained a higher proportion of lower margin
installation services and a lower proportion of relatively
higher margin maintenance and support services in fiscal 2006
compared to fiscal 2005. While we cannot predict the extent to
which changes in service mix and competitive pressures will
continue to impact our service margin, we expect that service
margins will remain in the range of 38% to 41% of service
revenues in fiscal 2007.
Operating Expenses
Research and Development:
Research and development expenses decreased from 12.1% of total
revenues in fiscal 2005 to 11.4% in fiscal 2006, with spending
in absolute dollars growing by $2.7 million year-over-year.
The reduction as a percentage of revenues are primarily
attributable to the 13.1% year-over-year revenue increase, with
the absolute dollar increase being a continuation of our
strategic investment in the development and enhancement of our
IP-based
communications
solutions.
Historically, we have invested between 11% and 17% of revenues
on research and development from fiscal 2002 through fiscal
2006, consistent with an aggressive research and development
investment strategy that has positioned us with a broad range of
feature-rich, scalable, standards-based and interoperable
IP-based communication solutions. We anticipate that we will
continue to invest in research and development at fiscal 2006
levels, at a minimum, in absolute dollars, for the foreseeable
future. These expenses may vary, however, as a percentage of
revenues.
The TPC Agreement, as last amended on October 31, 2006 (as
described under Description of Share Capital
Warrants Technology Partnerships Canada
Warrants) requires us to invest an aggregate of
C$366.5 million worth of research and development over a
seven year period commencing on March 31, 2005, with a
minimum of C$45.8 million to be invested each year. We
spent C$52.5 million on research and development during the
year ended March 31, 2006 and therefore achieved the
minimum requirement during the first year of the seven year
period.
Selling, General and
Administrative:
SG&A expenses decreased from 33.6% of total revenues in
fiscal 2005 to 31.1% in fiscal 2006, with spending in absolute
dollars growing by $5.8 million year-over-year. The
decrease as a percentage of sales is primarily attributable to
the year-over-year revenue increase combined with our continued
efforts to contain costs while making the appropriate
investments in sales and marketing efforts. We anticipate that
investment levels for SG&A will be, at a minimum, maintained
at existing levels, in absolute dollars, for the foreseeable
future provided our revenues increase.
39
Additionally, in fiscal 2007 we expect to incur incremental
expenses associated with Sarbanes-Oxley regulatory compliance
and additional compensation expense associated with employee
stock option grants. While it is difficult to estimate the
incremental expense associated with employee stock option
grants, we are currently estimating that third party costs
associated with preparing us for Sarbanes-Oxley compliance in
addition to ongoing compliance costs will be approximately
$1 million in fiscal 2007.
Special Charges:
During the year ended April 30, 2006, we recorded net
special restructuring charges of $5.7 million related to
further cost reduction measures taken to align our operating
expense model with current revenue levels net of reversals of
prior years charges of $0.8 million resulting from
adjustments to original lease termination obligations for excess
space in Canada and the United Kingdom. The net restructuring
charges included workforce reduction costs of $5.7 million
for employee severance and benefits and associated legal costs
incurred in the termination of 84 employees throughout the
world. In addition, special charges included $0.8 million
of accreted interest costs associated with excess facilities
obligations.
During fiscal 2005, we recorded special restructuring charges of
$10.6 million related to further cost reduction measures
taken to align our operating expense model with current revenue
levels, net of reversals of prior years charges of
$0.3 million resulting primarily from adjustments to
original estimated severance costs. The net restructuring
charges included workforce reduction costs of $8.7 million
relating to employee severance and benefits and associated legal
costs incurred in the termination of 154 employees
throughout the world. Non-cancelable lease costs of
$1.3 million relating to excess facilities in certain
Canadian and United Kingdom offices and a loss on disposal of
capital assets of $0.9 million related to assets written
off as a result of the discontinuation of our ASIC design
program.
Subsequent to April 30, 2006, we implemented additional
restructuring actions which are expected to result in a special
charge in the quarter ending October 31, 2006. The
restructuring involved the termination of 104 employees
around the world and the consolidation of office locations in
the United States.
Gain on Sale of Manufacturing
Operations:
On August 31, 2001, we outsourced our manufacturing
operations, including the sale of related net assets and the
transfer of employees and certain liabilities to BreconRidge,
for total net consideration of $5.0 million in the form of
long-term promissory notes receivable of $5.4 million and
promissory notes payable of $0.4 million. The transaction
resulted in a loss on disposal of $1.5 million recorded in
fiscal 2002 operating expenses. The loss represented the excess
of the carrying value of the plant, equipment and manufacturing
workforce over the total net consideration. The long-term
promissory notes receivable, net of the long-term promissory
notes payable, were paid in full in February 2003, prior to the
original maturity date of August 31, 2003.
The original loss on disposal recorded during fiscal 2002
contained estimates and assumptions regarding expected
subleasing income arising from premises that had been subleased
to BreconRidge pursuant to the disposal of the manufacturing
operations. It became evident during both fiscal 2004 and fiscal
2005 that sublease income over the lease renewal period, which
was originally included in the estimated loss on disposal, would
no longer be realized. As a result, an amount of
$0.6 million and $3.4 million was recorded in fiscal
2004 and fiscal 2005, respectively, as an additional loss
arising on the disposal activity.
In fiscal 2006, the future estimated operating cost estimates
for the premises were re-evaluated with the result being a
reversal of $0.9 million of the loss on disposal previously
recognized. This reversal is shown as a gain on sale of
manufacturing operations in fiscal 2006.
40
Gain on Sale of Assets:
On August 31, 2005, we sold land, building and fixed assets
in Caldicot, United Kingdom relating to our United Kingdom
subsidiary for net proceeds of $12.4 million, resulting in
a pre-tax gain of $7.3 million. The transaction included a
commitment for us to
lease-back
a portion of
the property, which requires us to defer a portion of the gain
on sale equivalent to the present value of the lease payments.
As a result we entered into
a
6-month
interim
lease and
a
10-year
long-term
lease for
a portion of the property sold. Accordingly,
$5.8 million of the gain was deferred and is being
amortized over the combined
10
1
/
2
-year
term of the leases. The remaining gain of $1.5 million was
recognized in the results of operations in fiscal 2006.
Interest Expense:
Interest expense was $7.6 million in fiscal 2006 compared
to $2.6 million in fiscal 2005. The primary reason for the
increased interest expense was the interest associated with the
convertible note financing in the aggregate principal amount of
$55.0 million that was completed on April 27, 2005. In
comparison, the interest expense in the prior year consisted
primarily of mortgage interest associated with our facility in
the United Kingdom and the interest cost associated with
our accounts receivable securitization facility, which is
currently dormant. On August 31, 2005, we sold land,
building and fixed assets in the United Kingdom and used
the proceeds to discharge the balance of the associated mortgage
of $9.8 million. This reduction resulted in the elimination
of the associated interest expense on a
go-forward
basis.
Other (Income) Expense, Net:
Other (income) expense, on a net basis, consists primarily
of foreign exchange rate gains and losses, interest income and
amortization of the deferred gain on sale of the U.K. assets.
Other income, on a net basis, amounted to $0.4 million in
fiscal 2006 compared to $0.4 million during fiscal 2005.
The income recorded in fiscal 2006 is primarily attributable to
transactional foreign currency losses of $0.6 million,
interest income of $0.7 million and $0.3 million
amortization of the deferred gain on sale of assets compared
with interest income of $0.6 million being partially offset
by transactional foreign currency losses of $0.2 million in
fiscal 2005. We use foreign currency forward contracts and
foreign currency swaps to minimize the short-term impact of
currency fluctuations on foreign currency receivables, payables
and intercompany balances.
Mark-to-Market
Adjustment on Derivatives:
In April 2004, we issued preferred shares. At any date after
five years from the original issuance date, or any date
prior to a partial sale event (as defined in the terms of the
preferred shares) other than a public offering, the holders of
preferred shares have a right to require us to redeem the
preferred shares for cash. The redemption amount is equal to the
original issue price of C$1.00 per preferred share multiplied by
the number of preferred shares outstanding, plus any declared
but unpaid dividends, plus the then current fair market value of
the common shares into which the preferred shares are
convertible. As a portion of the redemption price of the
preferred shares is indexed to our common share price, an
embedded derivative exists which must be accounted for
separately under generally accepted accounting principles.
In fiscal 2006, we recorded a $32.6 million
non-cash
expense,
representing the
mark-to-market
adjustment on the derivative instrument associated with our
preferred shares. During fiscal 2005, the
non-cash
expense amount
was $5.3 million.
The difference between the initial carrying amount of the
derivative and the redemption amount is being accreted over the
five-year period to redemption, with the accretion of the
derivative being recorded as a non-cash expense in our
consolidated statement of operations. $22.0 million of the
$32.6 million adjustment in fiscal 2006 was directly
attributable to an increase in fair value estimate of our common
shares from C$1.00 to C$1.55 (U.S.$0.87 to U.S.$1.38).
41
Upon completion of this offering the preferred shares will be
converted into common shares and the derivative instrument
balance and the cumulative mark-to-market adjustments will be
reclassified into equity. As a result, further mark-to-market
adjustments relating to the preferred shares will not be
required upon completion of this offering.
Provision for Income Taxes:
We recorded net income tax recoveries of $1.9 million for
fiscal 2006 compared to income tax expense of $0.8 million
for fiscal 2005. The net change year-over-year of
$2.7 million is due to deferred tax recoveries of
$2.8 million recorded in fiscal 2006. In assessing the
realizability of deferred tax assets, we consider whether it is
more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred
tax assets will not be realized. During fiscal 2006, we
determined that certain deferred tax assets relating to our
United States operations are considered more likely than not to
be realized and therefore reduced our valuation allowance
resulting in a deferred tax recovery of $2.8 million.
Fiscal 2005 as compared to
Fiscal 2004 and the Transition Period
The following table sets forth our comparative results of
operations, both in dollars and as a percentage of total
revenues, for fiscal 2005 to fiscal 2004 and the Transition
Period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six days Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
April 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Amounts
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
202.9
|
|
|
|
59.6
|
|
|
|
213.2
|
|
|
|
62.3
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
75.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
137.8
|
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
37.7
|
|
|
|
(8.8
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
36.2
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
41.4
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
111.4
|
|
|
|
32.7
|
|
|
|
114.9
|
|
|
|
33.6
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
56.3
|
|
|
Special
charges
(1)
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
(9.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on sale of manufacturing operations
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
466.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles
(2)
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
(6.6
|
)
|
|
|
(41.3
|
)
|
|
|
(12.1
|
)
|
|
|
(19.0
|
)
|
|
|
85.2
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(53.2
|
)
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(39.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
Mark to market adjustment on derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
Beneficial conversion feature on convertible debentures
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(6.3
|
)
|
|
Income tax (recovery) expense
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
166.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(30.6
|
)
|
|
|
(9.1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
|
(14.5
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(19.0
|
)
|
|
|
62.1
|
%
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(50.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* the comparison is not meaningful
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and realign our business.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Acquired intangible assets relating to the acquisition of the
Mitel name, certain assets and subsidiaries from Zarlink in 2001
were fully amortized in 2004.
|
Revenues:
Revenues increased by $1.5 million, or 0.4%, in fiscal 2005
over fiscal 2004. During the Transition Period we recorded
$3.2 million of revenues. Revenues for this Transition
Period are not considered
42
reflective of revenues for an average six-day period, as we tend
to generate a larger proportion of our revenues towards the
latter portion of our fiscal periods.
Geographic
Segment Revenues:
The following table sets forth total sales by geographic
regions, both in dollars and as a percentage of total revenues,
for the fiscal periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Six days Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
April 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
161.4
|
|
|
|
47.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
153.5
|
|
|
|
44.9
|
%
|
|
$
|
(7.9
|
)
|
|
|
(4.9
|
)%
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
56.3
|
%
|
|
EMEA
|
|
|
140.5
|
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
145.5
|
|
|
|
42.5
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
|
Canada and CALA
|
|
|
33.4
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
37.2
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
11.4
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.4%
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From an operating segment perspective, fiscal 2005 revenues
increased marginally over fiscal 2004 levels due primarily to
increased revenues from Canada and CALA and EMEA as revenues
through our channel partners in these regions increased on a
year-over-year
basis.
The improved revenue performances in these regions were
partially offset by lower revenues in the United States, which
were primarily attributable to lower product and service
revenues resulting from the transition from legacy products and
services to emerging
IP-based
communications
solutions and services.
The following table sets forth total revenues for groups of
similar products and services, both in dollars and as a
percentage of total revenues, for the fiscal periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Six days Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
April 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Products:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Platforms and desktop appliances
|
|
$
|
168.1
|
|
|
|
49.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
165.1
|
|
|
|
48.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)%
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
40.6
|
%
|
|
|
Software applications
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
23.5
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
Other
(1)
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
26.5
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
207.1
|
|
|
|
60.8
|
|
|
|
207.7
|
|
|
|
60.7
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
53.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance and support
|
|
|
95.4
|
|
|
|
28.0
|
|
|
|
85.3
|
|
|
|
24.9
|
|
|
|
(10.1
|
)
|
|
|
(10.6
|
)
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
37.5
|
|
|
|
Installation
|
|
|
15.8
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
39.9
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
Managed Services
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
Professional and other services
|
|
|
11.8
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133.6
|
|
|
|
39.2
|
|
|
|
134.5
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
46.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.4%
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Other products include mainly OEM products representing
approximately four percent, six percent and three percent of
total revenue in fiscal 2004, fiscal 2005, and the Transition
Period, respectively.
|
Product Revenues:
Fiscal 2005 revenues from product sales was $207.7 million
or 60.7% of total revenues compared to $207.1 million or
60.8% of total revenues in fiscal 2004. The marginal increase in
product sales was primarily attributable to increased sales of
third party hardware platforms.
In fiscal 2005, revenues generated by communications platforms
and desktop devices, were down 2% over prior year levels.
Despite this nominal decline in overall sales, we continued to
see as expected, a significant shift in sales away from our
legacy communication platform products towards increased sales
of
IP-based
communications solutions. In fiscal 2005 sales of
IP-based
communication
platforms and desktop devices increased by 27% in comparison to
fiscal 2004 levels. This increase was in line with our strategy
to realign our efforts towards
IP-based
communications
solutions.
Services Revenues:
Fiscal 2005 revenues from services sales was 39.3% of total
revenues consistent with fiscal 2004 as a percentage of total
revenues and marginally up by $0.9 million year-over-year.
Despite overall service revenues staying relatively unchanged,
we experienced a significant decline in maintenance and support
revenues due primarily to increased competition and pricing
pressures on maintenance and support contract renewals in the
EMEA region. Offsetting the decline in maintenance and support
revenues, was a year- over-year increase in both installation
services (attributable to higher product sales through our
global direct sales offices) and professional and other services.
Gross Margin:
The following table sets forth gross margins, both in dollars
and as a percentage of revenues, for the fiscal years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Six days Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
April 30, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except percentages)
|
|
|
Products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
207.1
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
207.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
81.4
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
|
|
75.8
|
|
|
|
36.5
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
133.6
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
134.5
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
56.4
|
|
|
|
42.2
|
|
|
|
53.2
|
|
|
|
39.6
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
46.7
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
340.7
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
342.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
Gross Margin
|
|
|
137.8
|
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
|
|
37.7
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
Transition Period
The Transition Period gross margin, as a percentage of revenues,
was 25.0%. Gross margin for the Transition Period was negatively
impacted by both the relatively low level of revenues for the
period and the non-variable portion of cost of revenues during
the period.
Fiscal 2005 Compared to Fiscal
2004
Fiscal 2005 gross margin as a percentage of revenues decreased
to 37.7% of revenues compared to 40.4% of revenues in fiscal
2004.
44
Product gross margin as a percentage of revenues decreased from
39.3% in fiscal 2004 to 36.5% in fiscal 2005. The decline in
margin was primarily attributable to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a 1.5% decline as a result of increased freight and distribution
costs in fiscal 2005 compared to fiscal 2004;
|
|
|
|
|
|
a 1.0% decline as a result of (i) a shift in our communication
platform sales mix whereby total communication platform sales
contained a higher proportion of lower margin small and medium
business platforms in fiscal 2005 compared to fiscal 2004; and
(ii) increased price competition on desktop devices
resulted in price reductions which contributed in reducing
overall desktop device margins; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a 0.3% decline as a result of higher inventory obsolescence
provisions recorded in fiscal 2005 compared to fiscal 2004 due
primarily to the end of life of our
Mitel 3100 ICP
product.
|
Service gross margin also declined year-over-year from 42.2% in
fiscal 2004 to 39.6% in fiscal 2005. The decrease in service
margins was due primarily to the change in mix of service
revenues as total service revenues contained a higher proportion
of lower margin installation services and a lower proportion of
relatively higher margin maintenance and support services in
fiscal 2005 compared to fiscal 2004.
Operating Expenses
Research and Development:
Research and development expenses increased from 10.6% of total
revenues in fiscal 2004 to 12.1% of total revenues in fiscal
2005 with spending in absolute dollars increasing by
$5.2 million
year-over-year
to
$41.4 million.
During the Transition Period, we recorded research and
development expenses of $0.7 million, or 21.9% of total
revenues, for the period.
Selling, General and
Administrative:
SG&A expenses increased from 32.7% of total revenues in
fiscal 2004 to 33.6% of total revenues in fiscal 2005, with
spending in absolute dollars growing by $3.5 million to
$114.9 million
year-over-year.
The
increase in SG&A spending was due primarily to strategic
investment in marketing initiatives to improve our brand
identity and awareness in our key geographical markets.
Additionally, we continued to invest in the development of
channel relationships and expand our presence in Continental
Europe and the South Pacific. The overall spending growth was
partially offset by reduced SG&A spending resulting from
workforce reduction initiatives implemented in both fiscal 2005
and prior years relating to the centralization of various
general and administrative back-office functions.
During the Transition Period, we recorded SG&A expenses of
$1.8 million, or 56.3% of total revenues, for the period.
Special Charges:
Special charges as a percentage of revenues in fiscal 2005
decreased 0.3% compared to fiscal 2004 mainly as a result of
lower amounts being provided for non-cancelable lease costs
relating to excess facilities in fiscal 2005.
During fiscal 2005, we recorded special restructuring charges of
$10.6 million related to further cost reduction measures
taken to align our operating expense model with current revenue
levels, net of reversals of prior years charges of
$0.3 million resulting primarily from adjustments to
original estimated severance costs. The net restructuring
charges included workforce reduction costs of $8.7 million
relating to employee severance and benefits and associated legal
costs incurred in the termination of 154 employees
throughout the world. Non-cancelable lease costs of
$1.3 million relating to excess facilities in certain
Canadian and
45
United Kingdom offices and a loss on disposal of capital assets
of $0.9 million related to assets written off as a result
of the discontinuation of our ASIC design program.
No special charges were recorded during the Transition Period.
Loss on Sale of Manufacturing
Operations:
The original loss on disposal recorded during fiscal 2002
contained estimates and assumptions regarding expected
subleasing income arising from premises that had been subleased
to BreconRidge pursuant to the disposal of the manufacturing
operations. It became evident during both fiscal 2004 and fiscal
2005 that sublease income over the lease renewal period, which
was originally included in the estimated loss on disposal, would
no longer be realized.
Amortization of Acquired
Intangibles:
As part of the acquisition of the communications system business
from Zarlink in 2001, we recorded acquired intangible assets of
$92.2 million consisting of developed technology,
workforce, customer base and patents. Resulting amortization
expense amounted to $29.1 million and $0.2 million for
fiscal 2003 and fiscal 2004, respectively. Acquired intangible
assets were fully amortized in early fiscal 2004. Therefore, no
amortization expense was recorded in either the Transition
Period or fiscal 2005.
Interest Expense:
Interest expense was $2.6 million in fiscal 2005 compared
to $4.3 million in fiscal 2004, representing a decrease of
$1.7 million, as total borrowings declined year-over-year.
Other (Income) Expense, Net:
Other (income) expense, on a net basis, consists primarily
of foreign exchange rate gains and losses and interest income.
Other income, on a net basis, amounted to $0.4 million in
fiscal 2005 compared to other expense, on a net basis, of
$0.6 million in fiscal 2004. The income recorded in fiscal
2005 primarily resulted from interest income of
$0.6 million being partially offset by transactional
foreign currency losses of $0.2 million (compared with
transactional foreign currency losses of $1.0 million in
fiscal 2004), arising mainly from adverse movements between the
U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar during the year. We use
foreign currency forward contracts and foreign currency swaps to
minimize the short-term impact of currency fluctuations on
foreign currency receivables, payables and intercompany balances.
During the Transition Period we recorded other income, on a net
basis, of $0.2 million due primarily to transactional
foreign currency gains.
Mark-to-Market Adjustment on
Derivatives:
During fiscal 2005, we recorded a $5.3 million non-cash
expense representing the
mark-to-market
adjustment on the derivative instrument associated with our
preferred shares.
During the Transition Period, we recorded a $0.1 million
non-cash expense representing the
mark-to-market
adjustment on the derivative instrument associated with our
preferred shares.
Beneficial Conversion Feature
on Convertible Debentures:
During fiscal 2004, we recorded a $3.1 million expense
representing the beneficial conversion feature on the conversion
of debentures. The debentures, which did not have a fixed
conversion price at the commitment date, were converted into
common shares at a price that was lower than the fair market
value of the common shares at the commitment date. As a result,
a non-cash expense representing the difference between the
effective conversion price and the fair market value of the
common shares was calculated and recorded as required by
generally accepted accounting principles.
46
Provision for Income Taxes:
We recorded income tax expense of $nil for the Transition Period
and $0.8 million for fiscal 2005. The income tax expense
was mainly as a result of our United States subsidiary being in
a taxable position in fiscal 2005.
In fiscal 2004 we recorded income tax expense, net of deferred
tax recoveries, of $0.3 million. The current income tax
expense amounted to $2.0 million, arising as a result of
our United Kingdom subsidiary being in a taxable position in
fiscal 2004. This tax expense was largely offset by deferred tax
recoveries arising from deductible taxable amounts available to
us of $1.7 million.
Quarterly Results of
Operations
The following sets forth unaudited consolidated statements of
operations data for our eight most recent quarters ended
April 30, 2006. This unaudited information has been
prepared on the same basis as our annual consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this prospectus and includes
all adjustments necessary to fairly present the unaudited
quarterly results. These adjustments consist only of normal
recurring adjustments. This information should be read in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and
related notes appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. The
operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative
of results for any future period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul. 25,
|
|
|
Oct. 24,
|
|
|
Jan. 23,
|
|
|
Apr. 24,
|
|
|
Jul. 31,
|
|
|
Oct. 31,
|
|
|
Jan. 31,
|
|
|
Apr. 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except share and per share data, unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
82.4
|
|
|
$
|
84.1
|
|
|
$
|
84.6
|
|
|
$
|
91.1
|
|
|
$
|
91.7
|
|
|
$
|
95.9
|
|
|
$
|
97.6
|
|
|
$
|
101.9
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
|
49.0
|
|
|
|
52.5
|
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
|
|
56.5
|
|
|
|
53.8
|
|
|
|
56.0
|
|
|
|
55.7
|
|
|
|
60.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
33.4
|
|
|
|
31.6
|
|
|
|
29.4
|
|
|
|
34.6
|
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
39.9
|
|
|
|
41.9
|
|
|
|
41.7
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
26.9
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
29.7
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
28.7
|
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
Special
charges
(2)
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on sale of manufacturing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
(5.7
|
)
|
|
|
(14.9
|
)
|
|
|
(13.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
23.8
|
|
|
Income tax (recovery) expense
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(8.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(22.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.15
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.21
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (in
millions)
|
|
|
111.7
|
|
|
|
111.7
|
|
|
|
114.6
|
|
|
|
117.2
|
|
|
|
117.1
|
|
|
|
117.3
|
|
|
|
117.2
|
|
|
|
117.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-GAAP Financial Measure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(8.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(22.7
|
)
|
|
Add back: fair value adjustment on derivatives
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted net
loss
(3)
|
|
$
|
(8.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Quarterly Results of Operations excludes the Transition Period
as the results for this period are not comparable. Results of
Operations for the Transition Period are included in the
April 30, 2005 audited financial statements.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Special charges relate to restructuring activities, product line
exit and other loss accruals undertaken to improve our
operational efficiency and realign our business.
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
We define adjusted net loss as net loss excluding the change in
the fair value of the derivative instruments. This definition
may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by
other companies. We are presenting adjusted net loss because we
believe it provides a more complete understanding of our
business than could be obtained without this disclosure, as it
eliminates a
non-cash
charge that will be eliminated immediately following this
offering. The change in the fair value in derivative instruments
resulted from our issuance of convertible, redeemable preferred
shares that give holders the right, at any time after five
years, to require us to redeem these shares for cash. The
requirement to redeem these shares on an
as-if-converted-to-common share basis qualifies as an embedded
derivative. The embedded derivative is being marked to market
throughout the period to redemption with a non-cash charge being
reflected in our Consolidated Statement of Operations. Adjusted
net loss shows what our net income would have been without the
effect of this non-cash charge. We believe that this is a useful
measure to our investors as the convertible redeemable preferred
shares will automatically convert into common shares in
connection with the closing of this offering with the result
being the elimination of this non-cash charge in the future. The
use of adjusted net loss has limitations and you should not
consider adjusted net loss in isolation from or as an
alternative to U.S. GAAP measures, such as net income or cash
flow statement data that are prepared in accordance with U.S.
GAAP, or as a measure of profitability or liquidity.
|
Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
We will be required to document and test our internal controls
over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the
United States
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of
2002, so that our management can certify as to the effectiveness
of our internal controls and our independent registered public
accounting firm can render an opinion on managements
assessment and on the effectiveness of our internal controls
over financial reporting commencing with our annual report for
the fiscal year ended April 30, 2008.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
As of April 30, 2006, we had cash and cash equivalents of
$35.7 million. Following the issuance of our convertible
notes in April 2005, we repaid and cancelled our credit facility
with Bank of Montreal. Following the sale of the land, building
and fixed assets in Caldicot, United Kingdom in August 2005, the
Barclays credit facilities, which were secured by the Caldicot
property, were repaid and cancelled.
We have incurred significant operating losses since our
incorporation in 2001. As a result, we have generated negative
cash flows from operations, and had an accumulated deficit of
$355.5 million at April 30, 2006. Our primary source
of funds has been proceeds from the issuance of equity and debt
securities. From inception through April 30, 2006, we have
received net proceeds of $362.0 million from issuances of
our common shares, preferred shares, warrants, convertible
debentures and convertible notes.
Our source for cash in the future is expected to come from the
issuance of additional equity and/or debt and operations.
On September 21, 2006, we closed a common share warrant
offering under which we sold warrants to Wesley Clover for total
consideration of $15 million. The holder of these warrants
can acquire common shares at no additional consideration, such
number of common shares to be determined in accordance with a
formula set forth in the warrants. If these warrants are
exercised in connection with an initial public offering, the
holder will be entitled to receive additional warrants to
acquire common shares in accordance with a formula set forth in
these additional warrants. See Description of Share
Capital Warrants Wesley Clover
Warrants.
In addition, we implemented further additional restructuring
actions which are expected to result in a special charge in the
quarter ending October 31, 2006. The restructuring involved
the termination of 104 employees around the world and the
consolidation of office locations in the United States.
The outstanding convertible notes mature on April 28, 2010.
If the convertible notes have not been converted into common
shares by their maturity date, we will have to repay the note
holders the principal amount of $55.0 million. In addition,
repayment may be required prior to the maturity date in the
event of
48
a default or fundamental change under the convertible
notes. The convertible notes contain customary events of
default, including, but not limited to, payment defaults,
breaches of agreements and conditions, covenant defaults, cross
defaults (including an event of default under the TPC
Agreement), redemption of our share capital and certain events
of bankruptcy or insolvency. A default by us in the performance
of any covenant, agreement or condition in the convertible notes
will generally not constitute an event of default, unless the
default continues, unremedied, for a period of 30 days
after we have been given notice of the default by a noteholder.
Depending upon our liquidity at the time of repayment, we may be
required to seek additional funding in order to meet our
obligations with respect to such a repayment of the convertible
notes. See Description of Convertible Notes.
The defined benefit pension plan in place for a number of our
past and present employees in the United Kingdom had an unfunded
pension liability of $40.1 million at April 30, 2006.
During fiscal 2007 we expect to make contributions of
$2.9 million to this pension plan. The contributions to
fund the benefit obligations under this plan are based on
actuarial valuations, which themselves are based on certain
assumptions about the long term operations of the plan,
including employee turnover and retirement rates, the
performance of the financial markets and interest rates. The
next actuarial valuation for the purposes of determining the
funding requirements is due as at August 1, 2006 and we
expect to have a new schedule of contributions agreed upon and
put in place by the end of March 2007. Due to the increase of
$15.0 million in the unfunded pension liability during
fiscal 2006, we expect our funding requirements to increase in
future years. The amount of the increase will depend upon the
time period in which the deficit is amortized. If the deficit is
amortized over 15 years, which is our current practice, we
would expect our annual funding requirements to increase by
approximately $2.5 million. If the deficit is amortized
over 10 years, we would expect our annual funding
requirements to increase by approximately $4.5 million. The
actual amount of the increase in funding will depend upon the
results of the actuarial valuation due August 1, 2006,
which may or may not be consistent with our expectations. We
expect to fund the expected future increased annual
contributions out of our expected future cash flows from
operations.
We anticipate that additional expenditures will be required to
fund various initiatives as we implement our business
strategies. These additional expenditures include, but are not
limited to, increased investment in sales and marketing efforts
with larger business customers, continued investment in the
expansion of geographic presence and distribution capabilities
and continued investment in strategic partnerships and
alliances. Additionally, we anticipate continued investment in
our IP-based product offerings specifically around increasing
product scalability and an increased focus on software
applications. We expect to fund these additional expenditures
out of our future cash inflows from operations and therefore, an
increase in collection of accounts receivable from our customers.
In addition to operating expenses it is anticipated that the
implementation of our business strategies will require an
increased investment in capital expenditures. We expect to fund
these additional expenditures out of our future cash flows from
operations and/or future equipment leasing facilities.
Based on our existing cash and cash equivalents existing as at
September 2006 of $17.2 million, the expected cash outflows
of $6-7 million relating to the restructuring actions
carried out in the quarter ending October 31, 2006, and our
expected cash flows from operations, we believe that we will
have sufficient liquidity to support our business operations
throughout the fiscal year ending April 30, 2007. However,
we may be required, or could elect, to seek additional funding
prior to that time. Our future capital requirements will depend
on many factors, including our rate of revenue growth, the
timing and extent of spending to support product development
efforts and expansion of sales and marketing, the timing of
introductions of new products and enhancements to existing
products, and market acceptance of our products. In addition,
although we do not currently have arrangements or commitments
with respect to any particular acquisition, we may elect to seek
additional funding if we pursue an acquisition. Additional
equity or debt financing may not be available on acceptable
terms or at all. We believe that our sources of liquidity beyond
April 30, 2007 will be our then current cash balances,
funds from operations and any long-term credit facilities we may
be able to arrange.
49
Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
Comparison of fiscal 2006 to fiscal 2005
|
Below is a summary of comparative results of cash flows and a
more detailed discussion of results for fiscal 2006 and fiscal
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
(31.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
29.5
|
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
(31.8
|
)
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
(17.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
9.7
|
|
|
$
|
35.7
|
|
|
$
|
26.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Used in Operating Activities:
|
Cash used in operating activities improved by $29.5 million
for fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005. This was primarily due
to an improvement of net operating loss of $34.6 million,
which was partially offset by an increase in cash interest
expense of $2.6 million.
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities:
|
Investing activities provided $3.7 million in cash for
fiscal 2006 compared to $5.8 million used in investing
activities for fiscal 2005. The most significant factors
contributing to the $9.5 million improvement were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$12.4 million in proceeds resulting from the sale of our
Caldicot property in August 2005; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
$2.8 million in net proceeds resulting from net foreign
exchange gain on our hedging activities.
|
The above factors were offset by the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$4.3 million increase in additions to capital; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
$1.4 million increase in restricted cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities:
|
Financing activities used $11.7 million in cash for fiscal
2006 compared to providing $20.1 million in cash for fiscal
2005. The most significant factors contributing to the
$31.8 million change between the periods were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the repayment of $9.8 million owed on our mortgage of the
Caldicot property following its sale in August 2005;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the $12.4 million proceeds received upon the issuance of
warrants to Technology Partnerships Canada in fiscal 2005
pursuant to research and development funding received from
Technology Partnerships Canada; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
cash provided by bank indebtedness was $8.2 million less in
fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005.
|
50
Comparison of Fiscal 2004, Fiscal 2005 and the
Six-Day
Period ended
April 30, 2005
Below is a summary of comparative cash flows and a more detailed
discussion of results for fiscal 2004, fiscal 2005 and the
Transition Period ended April 30, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Days
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
10.8
|
|
|
$
|
(31.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(42.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(6.3
|
)
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
39.3
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
4.4
|
|
|
$
|
(17.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
36.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
26.7
|
|
|
$
|
9.7
|
|
|
$
|
(17.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities:
|
Net cash used in operating activities was $1.2 million
during the Transition Period and $31.8 million for fiscal
2005. During fiscal 2004, $10.8 million in net cash was
generated by operating activities. The decline in cash generated
from operating activities in fiscal 2005 was due to higher
operating losses in fiscal 2005 driven primarily by lower gross
margins, our decision to increase investment in research and
development, and higher selling, general and administrative
expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Used in Investing Activities:
|
Net cash used in investing activities was $1.1 million
during the Transition Period, primarily related to an increase
in restricted cash, and $5.8 million for fiscal 2005,
primarily related to capital expenditures on computer equipment
and realized foreign exchange gains and losses as a result of
hedging activities. During fiscal 2004, investing activities
consumed $6.3 million in cash, primarily related to capital
expenditures on computer equipment and realized foreign exchange
gains and losses as a result of hedging activities.
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities:
|
Net cash provided by financing activities was $39.3 million
for the Transition Period and $20.1 million in fiscal 2005.
In fiscal 2004, $2.0 million was used in financing
activities. Cash flows from financing activities in the
Transition Period were mainly attributable to $55 million
gross proceeds from the issuance of the convertible notes and
$14.6 million used to repay bank indebtedness. Cash from
financing activities in fiscal 2005 was mainly attributable to
proceeds of $12.4 million from the issuance of warrants,
proceeds of $8.9 million as a result of an increase in bank
indebtedness, and proceeds of $3.5 million from the
issuance of common shares and payment of employee share purchase
loans offset by $4.7 million used to repay long term debt,
related party loans and share issuance costs. Cash from
financing activities in fiscal 2004 was mainly attributable to
net proceeds of $12.9 million from the issuance of
preferred shares, and proceeds of $9.8 million from the
issuance of warrants, offset by repayments of bank indebtedness,
related party loans, long-term debt and capital lease
obligations totaling $25.2 million.
51
The following table sets forth our contractual obligations as of
April 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
After
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Long-term debt
obligations
(1)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Capital lease
obligations
(1)
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease
obligations
(2)
|
|
|
73.7
|
|
|
|
15.6
|
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
21.4
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
|
Purchase
obligations
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit pension plan
contributions
(4)
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible
notes
(5)
|
|
|
73.5
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
55.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual cash obligations
|
|
$
|
154.6
|
|
|
$
|
25.3
|
|
|
$
|
43.0
|
|
|
$
|
77.1
|
|
|
$
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents the principal and interest payments for the loans.
Interest on these loans ranges from 1.3% to 11.8%, as described
in our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Operating lease obligations exclude payments to be received by
us under sublease arrangements.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Represents primarily our obligation to acquire capital equipment
from BreconRidge pursuant to the supply agreement between us and
BreconRidge dated August 31, 2001.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Represents the estimated contribution to our defined benefit
pension plan over the next twelve months. Due to the increase of
$15.0 million in the unfunded pension liability during
fiscal 2006, we expect our funding requirements to increase in
future years. The amount of the increase will depend upon the
time period in which the deficit is amortized. If the deficit is
amortized over 15 years, which is our current practice, we
would expect our annual funding requirements to increase by
approximately $2.5 million. If the deficit is amortized
over 10 years, we would expect our annual funding
requirements to increase by approximately $4.5 million.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
Represents the principal balance on maturity of the convertible
notes and an estimate of the variable interest payable on the
convertible notes. The interest is based on a spread over
LIBOR of 500 basis points prior to an initial public
offering and 250 basis points subsequent to an initial
public offering. For the purposes estimating the variable
interest, LIBOR has been assumed to be 5%.
|
Liabilities arising from the deficit in our defined benefit
pension plan are not included in the above table. We maintain a
defined benefit pension plan in the United Kingdom. As at
April 30, 2006, the accumulated benefit obligation of
$144.3 million exceeded the fair value of the plan assets
of $104.2 million, resulting in an unfunded status of
$40.1 million as recorded in our consolidated balance sheet
as of April 30, 2006.
Obligations arising from research and development spending
commitments under the TPC Agreement (as described under
Description of Share Capital
Warrants Technology Partnerships Canada
Warrants) are not included in the above table. The TPC
Agreement, as last amended on October 31, 2006, requires us
to invest an aggregate of C$366.5 million worth of research
and development over a seven year period commencing on
March 31, 2005, with a minimum of C$45.8 million to be
invested each year. We spent C$52.5 million on research and
development during the year ended March 31, 2006 and
therefore achieved the minimum requirement during the first year
of the seven year period.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have the following material off balance sheet arrangements as
of April 30, 2006:
Letters of Credit:
We had $1.2 million in letters of credit outstanding as of
April 30, 2006.
Bid and Performance Related
Bonds:
We enter into bid and performance related bonds related to
various customer contracts. Potential payments due under these
may be related to our performance and/or our resellers
performance under the applicable contract. The total maximum
potential amount of future payments we could be required to
52
make under bid and performance related bonds, excluding letters
of credit, was $2.5 million as of April 30, 2006. Of
this amount, the amount relating to guarantees of our
resellers performance was $1.5 million as of
April 30, 2006. Historically, we have not made any payments
and we do not anticipate that we will be required to make any
material payments under these types of bonds.
Intellectual Property
Indemnification Obligations:
We enter into agreements on a regular basis with customers and
suppliers that include limited intellectual property
indemnification obligations that are customary in the industry.
These obligations generally require us to compensate the other
party for certain damages and costs incurred as a result of
third party intellectual property claims arising from these
transactions. The nature of these intellectual property
indemnification obligations prevents us from making a reasonable
estimate of the maximum potential amount we could be required to
pay to our customers and suppliers. Historically, we have not
made any significant indemnification payments under such
agreements and no amount has been accrued in the consolidated
financial statements with respect to these obligations.
Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements and
related disclosures in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires
us to make estimates and assumptions about future events that
can have a material impact on the amounts reported in our
consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. The
determination of estimates requires the use of assumptions and
the exercise of judgment and as such actual results could differ
from those estimated. Our significant accounting policies are
described in Note 3 of our audited consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. The following
critical accounting policies are those that we believe require a
high level of subjectivity and judgment and have a material
impact on our financial condition and operating performance:
revenue recognition, allowance for doubtful accounts, provisions
for inventory, provisions for product warranties, long-lived
asset depreciation, goodwill valuation, special charges,
contingencies, deferred taxes, pension and post-retirement
benefits, and derivative instruments.
For products sold through our network of channel partners,
wholesale distributors, solution providers, system integrators,
authorized resellers, and other technology providers,
arrangements usually involve multiple elements, including
post-contract technical support and training. We also sell
products and installation and related maintenance and support
services directly to customers. Due to the complexity of our
sales agreements, judgment is routinely applied principally in
the areas of customer acceptance, product returns, unbundling of
multiple element arrangements, and collectibility.
Our sales arrangements frequently include a contractual
acceptance provision that specifies certain acceptance criteria
and the period in which a product must be accepted or returned.
Consistent with SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin 101, we make an
assessment of whether or not these acceptance criteria will be
met by referring to prior experience in successfully complying
with customer specifications. In those cases where experience
supports that acceptance will be met, we recognize revenue once
delivery is complete, title and risk of loss has passed, the fee
is fixed and determinable and persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists.
The provision for estimated sales returns is recorded as a
reduction of revenues at the time of revenue recognition. If our
estimate of sales returns is too low, additional charges will be
incurred in future periods and these additional charges could
have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations. As a percentage of annual product revenues the
provision for sales returns was 1.3% on April 30, 2006
compared to 0.9% at both April 24, 2005 and April 30, 2005.
Direct revenue sales are comprised of multiple elements which
consist of products, maintenance and installation services. We
unbundle these products, maintenance and installation services
based on vendor specific objective evidence with any discounts
allocated across all elements on a pro-rata basis.
53
Collectibility is assessed based primarily on the credit
worthiness of the customer as determined by credit checks and
analysis, as well as customer payment history. Different
judgments or different contract terms could adversely affect the
amount and timing of revenues recorded.
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts:
|
Our allowance for doubtful accounts is based on our assessment
of the collectibility of customer accounts. A considerable
amount of judgment is required in order to make this assessment
including a detailed analysis of the aging of our accounts
receivable and the current credit worthiness of our customers
and an analysis of historical bad debts and other adjustments.
If there is a deterioration of a major customers credit
worthiness or actual defaults are higher than our historical
experience, our estimate of the recoverability of amounts due
could be adversely affected. We revisit our allowance for
doubtful accounts on a quarterly basis and adjust the estimate
to reflect actuals and change in expectations. As of
April 30, 2006 and April 30, 2005, the provision
represented 3% and 4% of gross receivables, respectively. It is
reasonably likely that this provision will not change
significantly in the future.
In order to record inventory at the lower of cost or market, we
must assess our inventory valuation, which requires judgment as
to future demand. We adjust our inventory balance based on
economic considerations, historical usage, inventory turnover
and product life cycles through the recording of a write-down
which is included in the cost of revenue. Assumptions relating
to economic conditions and product life cycle changes are
inherently subjective and have a significant impact on the
amount of the write-down.
As of April 24, 2005, April 30, 2005 and
April 30, 2006, our inventory has been written down by 9%,
8% and 10%, respectively, of gross inventory. The increase in
the write-down from April 30, 2005 to April 30, 2006
reflects an expected decrease in demand and forecasted sales for
certain product lines, including those which have been
discontinued in fiscal 2006, and also reflects additional
write-downs required as a result of compliance with Regulations
and Directives regarding the Restriction of the Use of Certain
Hazardous Substances in electrical and electronic equipment in
the United Kingdom and the European Union.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw materials
|
|
$
|
0.9
|
|
|
$
|
0.9
|
|
|
$
|
0.9
|
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
18.1
|
|
|
|
25.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.7
|
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
26.1
|
|
|
Less: inventory write-down
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
17.1
|
|
|
$
|
17.4
|
|
|
$
|
23.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9%
|
|
|
|
8%
|
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If there is a sudden and significant decrease in demand for our
products, or a higher risk of inventory obsolescence because of
rapidly changing technology and customer requirements, we may be
required to increase our inventory write-downs and our gross
margin could be adversely affected.
We accrue warranty costs, as part of cost of revenues, based on
expected material and labour support costs. The cost to service
the warranty is estimated on the date of sale based upon
historical trends in the volume of product returns within a
warranty period and the cost to repair or replace the equipment.
If we experience an increase in warranty claims that is higher
than our past experience, or an increase in actual costs to
service the claims is experienced, gross margin could be
adversely affected. The warranty provision declined from
$2.6 million at the end of fiscal 2005 to $2.0 million
at April 30, 2006. The decline is
54
primarily due to a reversal in United Kingdom customer
warranties relating to a specific program that has ended.
Actual warranty costs for fiscal 2006 were higher than the
previous year and higher than our expectations. Efforts are
being made to reduce these costs for fiscal 2007 through
negotiations for cost reductions with warranty service
providers. The following table provides a continuity of the
warranty provision over the past three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
Warranty costs incurred
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
Warranties issued
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Lived Assets:
We have recorded property, plant and equipment and intangible
assets at cost less accumulated amortization. The determination
of useful lives and whether or not these assets are impaired
involves significant judgment. We assess the impairment of
long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable.
In response to changes in industry and market conditions, we may
strategically realign our resources and consider restructuring,
disposing of or exiting businesses, which could result in an
impairment charge. We have not recorded any impairment charges
in fiscal 2005 or fiscal 2006 and do not expect any significant
future charges based on current information.
We assess goodwill for impairment on an annual basis or more
frequently if circumstances warrant, as required by FASB
Statement No. 142 Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
(SFAS 142). An impairment charge is recorded if
the implied fair value of goodwill of a reporting unit is less
than the book value of goodwill for that unit. We have four
geographic units that have assigned goodwill of
$6.8 million as of April 30, 2006. Quoted stock market
prices are not available for these individual reporting units.
Accordingly, consistent with SFAS 142, our methodology for
estimating the fair value of each reporting unit primarily
considers estimated future revenues and cash flows for those
reporting units along with many other assumptions. Future
revenue estimates inherently involve a significant amount of
judgment, and significant movements in revenues or changes in
the assumptions used may result in fluctuations in the value of
goodwill that is supported. The result of the most recent annual
impairment test suggests that the assumptions would need to
change significantly in order for an impairment to occur. There
have been no goodwill write-downs since the adoption of
SFAS 142.
We record restructuring, exit and other loss accruals when the
liability has been incurred. We reassess the accruals on a
regular basis to reflect changes in the timing or amount of
estimated restructuring and termination costs on which the
original estimates were based. New restructuring accruals or
reversals of previous accruals are recorded in the period of
change. Additional accruals for fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005
resulted from new restructuring activities and severance costs.
Reversals in the provision relate mostly to changes in lease
termination obligation estimates described below.
|
|
|
|
|
Lease Termination Obligations:
|
Estimates used to establish reserves related to real estate
lease obligations have been reduced for sublease income that we
believe is probable. Because certain real estate lease
obligations extend through fiscal 2011, assumptions were made as
to the timing, availability and amount of sublease income that we
55
expect to receive. In making these assumptions, many variables
were considered such as the vacancy rates of commercial real
estate in local markets and the market rate for sublease
rentals. Because we are required to project sublease income for
many years into the future, estimates and assumptions regarding
the commercial real estate market that were used to calculate
future sublease income may be different from actual sublease
income. During the twelve months ended April 30, 2006
a reversal of $1.7 million was made against our lease
termination obligation estimates as a result of changes in these
and other operating cost assumptions. Of this amount
$0.8 million related to special charge reversals and
$0.7 million related to the loss reversal on the disposal
of manufacturing operations. As of April 30, 2006, the
combined balance relating to lease termination obligations was
$7.5 million. This estimate will change as a result of
actual results, the passage of time and changes in assumptions
regarding vacancy, market rate, and operating costs.
We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the
differences between the financial statement carrying amounts and
the tax bases of assets and liabilities. Significant management
judgment is required in determining any valuation allowance
recorded against our net deferred tax assets. We make an
assessment of the likelihood that our deferred tax assets will
be recovered from future taxable income, and to the extent that
recovery is not believed to be more likely than not, a valuation
allowance is recorded. We have incurred significant operating
losses since our incorporation in 2001. With the exception of
our operations in the United States, we believe there is no
assurance that we will be able to achieve profitability, or
that, if achieved, such profitability can be sustained. As a
result there is uncertainty regarding the future utilization of
net deferred tax assets relating to most areas of the business
and consequently a valuation allowance equal to
$81.5 million has been recorded against the
$84.3 million net deferred tax assets at April 30,
2006. The amount that has not been provided for relates to three
years of unrestricted United States losses. These losses are
believed to be recoverable since we have a history of utilizing
losses in the United States over the past three consecutive
years, and expect to continue to use them in each of the next
three years.
Our U.K. subsidiary maintains a defined benefit pension plan.
Our defined benefit pension costs are developed from actuarial
valuations. Inherent in these valuations are key assumptions
provided by us to the actuaries, including discount rates,
expected return on plan assets and rate of compensation
increases. In estimating the rates and returns, we consider
current market conditions and anticipate how these will affect
discount rates, expected returns and rates of compensation
increases. Material changes in our pension benefit costs may
occur in the future as a result of changes to these assumptions
or from fluctuations in our related headcount or market
conditions.
During fiscal 2006 our pension liability increased from
$25.1 million to $40.1 million. This increase largely
resulted from an actuarial loss of $41.0 million, offset by
a gain in the plan assets of $21.3 million.
The actuarial loss increased from $1.3 million in fiscal
2005 to $41.0 million in fiscal 2006 mainly due to changes
in assumptions used for disclosures at each measurement date.
The increase in the loss is primarily driven by the decrease in
discount rate assumption from 5.5% in 2005 to 5.0% in 2006,
which accounts for 66% of the increase. Increases in inflation
rate and compensation rate assumptions, as well as
56
an expected increase in mortality also contributed to the
increased loss. The following assumptions were used in valuing
the liabilities and benefits under the pension plan:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
April 25,
|
|
|
April 24,
|
|
|
April 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
5.50%
|
|
|
|
5.50%
|
|
|
|
5.00%
|
|
|
Compensation increase rate
|
|
|
2.50%
|
|
|
|
2.50%
|
|
|
|
2.75%
|
|
|
Investment returns assumption
|
|
|
7.75%
|
|
|
|
7.75%
|
|
|
|
7.25%
|
|
|
Inflation rate
|
|
|
2.50%
|
|
|
|
2.50%
|
|
|
|
2.75%
|
|
|
Average remaining service life of employees
|
|
|
20 years
|
|
|
|
20 years
|
|
|
|
21 years
|
|
Embedded derivatives exist in a number of our securities. We
issued convertible, redeemable preferred shares which have a
redemption value that is indexed to our common share price. This
redemption feature qualifies as a derivative instrument. Our
convertible notes contain a Make-Whole Premium (as
that term is defined in the Convertible Notes) and certain
redemption rights upon a Fundamental Change (as that
term is defined in the Convertible Notes). The Make Whole
Premium and redemption rights upon a Fundamental Change qualify
as derivative instruments. The embedded derivatives noted above
have to be accounted for separately under FASB Statement
No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. The embedded derivatives are then marked-to-market
with changes in the value recorded in our consolidated statement
of operations. Changes in key assumptions used in determining
the market value of the embedded derivatives, specifically,
assumptions used in: (a) present value calculations,
(b) movements in our future common share price,
(c) factors determining the likelihood of a Fundamental
Change and (d) factors determining the likelihood of both a
Fundamental Change and Make-Whole Premium, could have a material
impact on our financial statements.
Based on the above listed assumptions, the values of the
Make-Whole Premium and redemption feature derivatives at
April 30, 2006 were nominal and $75.9 million
respectively. The derivative relating to the redeemable
preferred shares reflects a discount rate of 17%, common share
fair value of $1.38, and a remaining term of three years.
The basis to support the significant redemption feature
valuation assumptions as of April 30, 2006 is
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The discount rate is determined based on several factors
including our credit risk, cost of borrowing and liquidity risk.
The original discount rate of 17% when the redeemable preferred
shares were issued took these factors into consideration with
credit risk to maturity being primarily considered in setting
the rate above our cost of borrowing which would have been
attainable at rates lower than 17%. We evaluate the
appropriateness of the discount rate on a regular basis. As of
April 30, 2006, we believed that the rate of 17% continued
to be appropriate. The basis for this opinion was that while the
credit risk may have decreased due to the reduced term to
maturity and improved financial results, we did not have access
to unsecured credit facilities and as a result there might have
been an offsetting increased liquidity risk. In addition, at
April 30, 2006 there was an additional impending liquidity
risk of the put options on the common shares being exercised if
we did not complete an initial public offering by
September 1, 2006 (subsequent to April 30, 2006 this
date was extended to May 1, 2007).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of the common shares at the time the redeemable
preferred shares were issued in April 2004 was determined to be
$0.87 (C$1.00). The fair value of the shares used in the
calculation of the fair value of the derivative at
April 30, 2006 was $1.38 (C$1.55). The $1.38 (C$1.55) value
of the common shares is discussed in the section
Determination of Fair Market Value of our Common
Shares.
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At any time after five years, our preferred shareholders have
the right to require us to redeem the shares. Since the shares
were issued in April 2004, there were three years remaining as
at April 30, 2006.
|
The common share fair value is based on a number of highly
subjective qualitative and quantitative assumptions made by
management. In fiscal 2006, a fair value adjustment of
$32.6 million was recorded in our consolidated statement of
operations. Of this amount, $22.0 million was directly
attributable to an increase in fair value estimate from C$1.00
to C$1.55 (U.S.$0.87 to U.S.$1.38).
The following table highlights the sensitivity of the
derivatives fair value adjustment to changes in discount
rate and fair value assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on Loss
|
|
|
|
|
before income taxes
|
|
|
Change in Assumption
|
|
(Increase)/Decrease
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
1 percentage point increase in discount rate
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
1 percentage point decrease in discount rate
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
1 cent increase in fair value of common share price
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
1 cent decrease in fair value of common share price
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
The preferred shares will be converted in accordance with their
terms upon completion of this offering. As a result of this
conversion the derivative instruments balance will be
reclassified into equity.
Determination of Fair Market Value of our Common Shares
Prior to December 2005, the fair market value of our common
shares was determined by our board of directors with input from
management. All of the members of our board of directors during
this period were experienced in the technology industry and
certain members also had experience in the private equity
markets. Our directors valued our common shares by considering
objective and subjective factors including prices in arms-length
financing transactions involving our capital stock, the
non-liquid nature of our common shares, the superior rights and
preferences of our preferred shares, our operating results, our
prospects at the date of the respective grants and the
likelihood of achieving a liquidity event for our common shares
underlying the options, such as an initial public offering or
sale of the company, given prevailing market conditions.
In April 2004, we entered into a financing transaction where we
issued 20 million Series A Preferred Shares at a share
price of C$1.00 per share and five million warrants
exercisable at a price of C$1.25 each, for total consideration
of C$20 million. The Series A Preferred Shares were
convertible on a 1:1 basis for our common shares for a period of
two years, after which they are convertible into a certain
number of additional common shares depending upon the fair
market value of the common shares. The Series A Preferred
Shares also have certain liquidity preferences over our common
shares. In light of the April 2004 financing, our board of
directors set an exercise price at C$1.00 per common share for
the options granted on July 15, 2004 and July 26, 2004
(the exercise price being equal to the per share pricing of the
Series A Preferred Shares issued in April 2004). Given the
relatively short time from the April 2004 financing round our
board of directors determined that C$1.00 per common share was
not less than the fair market value of a common share,
especially given that the options were for common shares which
did not have the same liquidity preference as our Series A
Preferred Shares. Our board of directors continued to set the
exercise price at C$1.00 per common share for the options
granted from August 20, 2004 to December 8, 2005. The
valuation during this period was due to the boards
assessment of our financial performance during this period in
which we continued to incur net losses in each fiscal quarter.
Prior to December 2005, we did not obtain contemporaneous
valuations prepared by an unrelated valuation specialist at the
time of each stock option grant because we believed that our
board of directors and management possessed the requisite
valuation expertise to prepare a reasonable estimate of the fair
value of the underlying common shares at the time of each grant.
In December 2005, we decided to proceed with this offering in
the United States and Canada. As a result, our board of
directors and
58
management decided to retain an unrelated valuation firm to
calculate the fair value of our common shares as at the end of
each quarter in fiscal 2006. The exercise price set by our board
of directors for the options granted from June 9, 2005 to
December 8, 2005, was retrospectively verified by the
results of the arms-length valuation for the quarters ended
July 31, 2005 and October 31, 2005. Our board of
directors set exercise prices of C$1.16 and C$1.55 for the
options granted on March 8, 2006 and May 5, 2006,
respectively. These valuations were based on a contemporaneous
valuation by the valuation firm.
As permitted by the AICPA Audit and Accounting Practice Aid
Valuation of Privately-Held Company Equity Securities
Issued as Compensation, the valuation firm estimated the
fair value of our common equity on a per share basis using a
probability weighted analysis of the present value of the
returns afforded to our common shareholders. In doing this
analysis, the valuation firm considered various scenarios
including the completion of this offering, our continued
operation as a private company and an orderly liquidation of our
assets. The valuation firm then adjusted the range of
probabilities assigned to these scenarios in each quarter as
appropriate. In estimating the fair value of the common shares
on a going-concern basis, the valuation firm determined that
given the nature of our operations and the availability of both
historic and forecast financial information, estimation of the
value of the common shares on a per share basis using the market
approach methodologies and income approach methodologies was
appropriate. The market approach was based on historical
valuation multiples of comparable publicly traded companies, and
the income approach was based on a discounted cash flow method
applied to managements projections.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS 123(R)
In December 2004, the FASB issued Statement No. 123
(revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(SFAS 123R), which revises SFAS 123 and
supercedes APB 25. SFAS 123R requires all share-based
payments to employees, including grants of stock options, to be
recognized in the financial statements based on their fair
values. The statement is effective for us as of the beginning of
our fiscal 2007. We will be applying the provisions of this
statement prospectively to new awards and to awards modified,
repurchased, or cancelled after May 1, 2006 with the
associated compensation expense being recognized on a
straight-line basis over the requisite service period. As the
requirements of SFAS 123R depend on future awards,
modifications, repurchases or cancellations, the impact on our
consolidated financial statements when this statement becomes
effective is not yet fully determinable.
SFAS 151
In November 2004, the FASB issued Statement No. 151,
Inventory Costs (SFAS 151). SFAS 151
amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4,
Inventory Pricing, to clarify the types of costs
that should be expensed rather than capitalized as inventory.
Among other provisions, the new rule requires that items such as
idle facility expense, excessive spoilage, double freight, and
rehandling costs be recognized as current-period charges
regardless of whether they meet the criterion of so
abnormal as stated in ARB No. 43. Additionally,
SFAS 151 requires that the allocation of fixed production
overhead to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. SFAS 151 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005,
or for our fiscal 2007. We are currently evaluating the
requirements of SFAS 151 and have not yet fully determined
the impact, if any, on the consolidated financial statements
when this statement becomes effective.
SFAS 153
In December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153,
Exchanges of Non-monetary Assets. This standard
amended APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for
Non-monetary Transactions, to eliminate the fair value
measurement exception for non-monetary exchanges of similar
productive assets and replaces it with a general exception for
exchanges of non-monetary assets that do not have commercial
substance. A non-monetary exchange has commercial substance if
the future cash flows of the entity are expected to
59
change significantly as a result of the exchange. This statement
is effective for all non-monetary asset exchanges completed by
the company starting fiscal 2007. We have not engaged in
non-monetary asset exchanges in the current period and the
provisions of SFAS No. 153 are not expected to have a
significant impact when this statement becomes effective.
SFAS 154
In May 2005, the FASB issued Statement No. 154, Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections a replacement of APB
Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3. SFAS 154
replaces APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes, and FASB
Statement No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim
Financial Statements. SFAS 154 changes the requirements for
the accounting for, and reporting of, a change in accounting
principle. SFAS 154 requires that a voluntary change in
accounting principle be applied retrospectively with all prior
period financial statements presented using the new accounting
principle. SFAS 154 is effective for accounting changes and
corrections of errors in fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2005. We will apply these requirements to
changes and correction of errors made after May 1, 2005.
FSP
SFAS
143-1
In June 2005, FASB issued FASB Staff Position (FSP)
SFAS No.
143-1,
Accounting for Electronic Equipment Waste
Obligations, to address the accounting for obligations
associated with the European Union Directive on Waste Electrical
and Electronic Equipment (the Directive). The
Directive concludes that commercial users are obligated to
retire, in an environmentally sound manner, specific assets that
qualify as historical waste. The FSP requires capital treatment
for this obligation and is to be adopted on the later of the
first reporting period ending after June 8, 2005 or the
date of adoption of the law by the applicable
EU-member
country. The
Directive is currently under review in the United Kingdom and is
expected to be transposed into U.K. law in fiscal 2007. We will
continue to evaluate the impact as the United Kingdom and other
EU-member countries enact the legislation.
SFAS 155
In February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS 155
Accounting
for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments
, which eliminates
the exemption from applying SFAS 133 to interests in
securitized financial assets so that similar instruments are
accounted for similarly regardless of the form of the
instruments. SFAS 155 also gives entities the option of
applying fair value accounting to certain hybrid financial
instruments in their entirety if they contain embedded
derivatives that would otherwise require bifurcation under
SFAS 133. Under the new approach, fair value accounting
would replace the current practice of recording fair value
changes in earnings. The election of fair value measurement
would be allowed at acquisition, at issuance, or when a
previously recognized financial instrument is subject to a
remeasurement event. Adoption is effective for all financial
instruments acquired or issued after the beginning of an
entitys first fiscal year that begins after
September 15, 2006. We are currently evaluating the
requirements of SFAS 155 and have not yet fully determined
the impact, if any, on the consolidated financial statements
when this statement becomes effective.
EITF
05-2
In June 2005,
EITF
05-2
The
Meaning of Conventional Convertible Debt Instrument
in Issue
No.
00-19
was issued and is to be applied to new instruments entered into
and instruments modified in periods beginning after
June 29, 2005. The new EITF clarifies that instruments that
are convertible into a fixed number of shares at the option of
the holder, based on the passage of time or a contingent event,
should be considered conventional for purposes of
applying
Issue
00-19.
The
EITF also clarifies that convertible preferred stock with a
mandatory redemption date may qualify for the exception included
in paragraph 4 of
Issue
00-19
if the
economic characteristics indicate that the instrument is more
akin to debt than equity. The requirements of
EITF
05-2
have not
had an impact on the consolidated financial statements for the
applicable periods beginning after June 29, 2005.
60
In June 2006, the FASB issued FIN No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109
(FIN 48). FIN 48 clarifies the accounting
for uncertainty in income tax positions and refunds. The
interpretation prescribes a more-likely-than-not threshold and a
measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition
and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken
in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides accounting guidance
on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties,
accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. The
significant changes introduced by FIN 48 could affect the
assessment of the valuation allowance and deferred tax asset.
Differences between amounts currently recognized and those
determined under the new guidance will need to be recorded on
the date of adoption. We are required to adopt the provisions of
FIN 48 in fiscal 2008 and are currently assessing the
impact of the adoption on the consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 157,
Fair Value
Measurements,
(SFAS 157). This Standard
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective
for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007 and
interim periods within those fiscal years. We are currently
evaluating the requirements of SFAS 157 and have not yet
fully determined the impact, if any, on the consolidated
financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB also issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 158,
Employers Accounting
for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans an amendment of FASB Statement No. 87,
88, 106 and 132(R),
(SFAS 158)
.
This
standard requires companies to recognize a net liability or
asset and an offsetting adjustment to accumulated other
comprehensive income to report the funded status of defined
benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans. The
standard also requires companies to measure plan assets and
obligations at their year-end balance sheet date. SFAS 158
is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15,
2006. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of
SFAS 158 on the consolidated financial statements.
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of
Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in
Current Year Financial Statements
(SAB 108). SAB 108 was issued in order to
eliminate the diversity of practice surrounding how public
companies quantify financial statement misstatements.
SAB 108 permits registrants to record the cumulative effect
of initial adoption by recording the necessary adjustments to
the carrying values of assets and liabilities as of the
beginning of that year with the offsetting adjustment recorded
to the opening balance of retained earnings only if material
under the dual method. SAB 108 is effective for fiscal
years ending on or after November 15, 2006. We do not
expect the adoption of SAB 108 to have a material impact on
our consolidated financial statements.
Qualitative and Quantitative Disclosure about Market Risk
Market risk is the risk of loss in our future earnings due to
adverse changes in financial markets. We are exposed to market
risk from changes in our common share price, foreign exchange
rates and interest rates. Inflation has not had a significant
impact on our results of operations.
Equity Price Risk:
On December 9, 2004 we adopted a deferred share unit
(DSU) plan for executives. Under the DSU plan, when
a participant ceases to be an executive of Mitel, the DSU plan
participant will receive a cash amount equal to the number of
DSUs in his or her account multiplied by the weighted average
61
trading price of our common shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange
on the five trading days immediately preceding the date the
DSU plan participant ceases to be an executive of Mitel, or on a
later date selected by the DSU plan participant, which shall in
any event be a date prior to the end of the following calendar
year. The obligation to pay the cash amount that is indexed to
the weighted average trading price of our common shares and
recorded as a liability in our financial statements, is
marked-to-market
in
each reporting period, with changes in the obligation recorded
in our consolidated statement of operations. As of
April 30, 2006, a $1.00 increase in our common share price
would increase our net loss by $0.6 million.
(April 30, 2005 $0.5 million).
Foreign Currency
Risk:
To manage our foreign currency risk, we use derivative financial
instruments including foreign exchange forward contracts and
foreign exchange swap contracts from time to time, that have
been authorized pursuant to policies and procedures approved by
our board of directors. We do not hold or issue financial
instruments for trading or speculative purposes. We currently
use foreign currency forward and swap contracts to reduce our
exposure to foreign currency risk.
The fair value of our foreign currency forward contract and swap
contracts is sensitive to changes in foreign currency exchange
rates. As of April 30, 2006, a 5% appreciation in the
Canadian dollar against all currencies would have resulted in an
additional unrealizable loss of $6.4 million
(April 30, 2005 less than $0.05 million).
We believe that the established hedges are effective against our
foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities. As a
result, any potential future losses from these hedges being
marked-
to-market
would be
largely offset by gains or losses on the underlying hedged
positions.
Interest Rate Risk:
In accordance with our corporate policy, cash equivalent and
short-term investment balances are primarily comprised of
high-grade commercial paper and money market instruments with
original maturity dates of less than three months. Due to the
short-term maturity of these investments, we are not subject to
significant interest rate risk.
We are exposed to interest rate risk on our convertible notes
which bear interest based on the London Inter-Bank Offer Rate or
LIBOR. Each adverse change in the LIBOR rate of 100
basis points would result in an additional $0.6 million in
interest expense per year. In September 2005, we entered into a
derivative contract with JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., in order to
limit the impact of changes in LIBOR on our interest expense
related to the convertible notes for the period commencing
November 1, 2005 and ending November 1, 2007. This
derivative contract effectively provides a cap on LIBOR of 5.27%
and a floor on LIBOR of 4.00%.
The interest rates on our obligations under capital leases are
fixed and therefore not subject to interest rate risk.
62
BUSINESS
Overview
We are a provider of integrated communications solutions and
services for business customers. Our Internet Protocol, or IP,
based communications solutions consist of a combination of
telephony hardware products, such as communications platforms
and desktop devices, and software applications that integrate
voice, video and data communications with business applications
and processes. We refer to these hardware products and software
applications as communications solutions because they are
configured to meet our customers specific communications
needs. We complement our communications solutions with a range
of services, including the design of communications networks,
implementation, maintenance, training and support services. We
believe that our IP-based communications solutions and services
enable our customers to realize significant cost benefits and to
conduct their business more effectively.
We have been a leading vendor of business communications systems
for over 25 years. Over the past five years, we have
invested heavily in the research and development of IP-based
communications solutions to take advantage of the telephone
communications industry shift from legacy systems to IP-based
systems. As a result of our efforts to realign our business to
discontinue certain activities relating to our legacy systems
and to focus our efforts on our IP-based communications
solutions we have incurred losses in each of the past five
fiscal years, including net losses of $44.6 million in
fiscal 2006 and $49.6 million in fiscal 2005. As at
April 30, 2006, we had an accumulated deficit of
$355.5 million. However, we believe our early and sustained
investment in IP-based research and development, and our
decision to concentrate our efforts on this other technology,
has positioned us well to take advantage of the industry shift
to IP-based communications solutions. As a result of this
strategic focus, we have experienced significant growth in the
sales of our IP-based communications solutions as businesses
migrate from their legacy systems. Our IP-based product revenues
represented 86% of total product revenue in fiscal 2006, an
increase of 48% in comparison to fiscal 2005. Additionally, 97%
of our system shipments for the quarter ended April 30,
2006 were IP-based communications solutions.
Our
IP-based
communications solutions are scalable, flexible, secure, easy to
deploy, manage and use, and are currently used by customers with
as few as 10 users in a single location to a customer with
systems that collectively support as many as 40,000 users
in multiple locations. Scalability refers to how well a hardware
or software system can adapt to increased demands and is a very
important feature because it means customers can invest in a
network with confidence that they will not outgrow it. Our
solutions can interoperate with various systems supplied by
other vendors, allowing our customers to migrate their legacy
systems towards an IP-based system at their own pace, and can
also be aligned with our customers business systems and
processes. We offer packaged software applications that are
designed to solve particular business communications challenges,
including applications for contact centers, mobility,
teleworking, messaging and collaboration. We also develop
solutions that focus on specific industries as well as custom
software applications that address the needs of specific
customers. Our customers include prominent hotel chains,
governmental agencies, retail chains and healthcare providers
worldwide. We operate from over 40 locations around the world
and we sell our communications solutions through a distribution
network of over 1,400 channel partners that includes wholesale
distributors, solutions providers, authorized resellers,
communication services providers, systems integrators, and other
distribution channels.
Our Industry
Historically, businesses have used a data network for their data
communications and a separate telephony network for their voice
communications. These legacy telephony networks are based on
circuit-switched
technology and use proprietary operating systems. These factors
limit the manner in which legacy telephony networks can
interoperate with other business applications or integrate with
business processes. Legacy telephony networks are relatively
expensive to operate and maintain since they require a separate
physical network within the business and a separate management
system. Conversely, data networks are
IP-based.
By using
IP-based
networks for
voice communications and associated applications, businesses can
now address their voice, video and data requirements using a
single converged network. A
63
converged network has significant advantages over maintaining
one network for data communications and a separate network for
voice communications.
Communication services providers, or carriers, are also
embracing
voice-over-Internet
Protocol or VoIP equipment as key elements of
next-generation converged carrier networks. We do not focus on
carrier VoIP infrastructure equipment or consumer VoIP equipment
such as residential VoIP phones. Rather, we focus on
communications solutions and services for business customers.
However, our systems are designed to interoperate with
carriers
next-generation
networks.
The global market for business IP telephony products and
services has grown rapidly since 2002. Synergy Research Group
estimates that enterprise IP telephony line shipments grew by a
compound annual growth rate of 68.7% from 2002 to 2005. Synergy
estimates that enterprise IP telephony market revenues were
approximately $3.8 billion worldwide in 2005 and are
expected to grow to over $10.6 billion by 2009,
representing a compound annual growth rate of 29.2%. Much of
this anticipated growth can be attributed to the expected
replacement of installed legacy systems with new
IP-based
systems.
Synergy forecasts that purchases of IP communications platforms
in 2006 will exceed those of legacy systems for the first time
in history and that
IP-based
systems will
comprise over 90% of all enterprise telephony purchases by 2009.
As this replacement cycle progresses, purchases of legacy
circuit-switched
telephony systems are expected to decline at a compound annual
rate of 40.9% from 2005 until 2009.
The largest geographic markets for business IP telephony are
North America and EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa), which
accounted for 46.5% and 35.5%, respectively, of the overall
global market for the twelve months ended December 31,
2005. The
Asia-Pacific
region and Latin America currently represent small but rapidly
growing markets, with business
IP-based
systems sales
in each region more than doubling in size since 2003. According
to InfoTech, a technology market research firm, in the United
States the large enterprise market (businesses with more than
500 employees) represented 64% of total IP telephony
shipments, while the small and
medium-sized
business
market (businesses with up to 500 employees) accounted for 36%
of total IP telephony shipments in 2005. However, InfoTech
expects the small and
medium-sized
business
market to grow at a faster rate than the large enterprise
market and projects the small and medium-sized business market
to represent 43% of total
IP-based
systems
shipments in the United States by 2010.
To date, the business IP telephony market has largely been
limited to early adopters. Most businesses have not yet migrated
to
IP-based
systems to
solve their voice communications needs. According to InfoTech,
only 36% of small and
medium-sized
businesses
in the United States have adopted
IP-based
systems but
this is expected to rise to 62% by 2009. Similarly, 73% of large
enterprise businesses in the United States are implementing
IP-based
systems, a
figure which is expected to grow to 89% by 2009.
When adopting
IP-based
systems, industry analysts have indicated that businesses prefer
to purchase their
IP-based
communications
solutions using a gradual migration approach rather than being
required to discard their existing network and telephony
infrastructure investments.
IP-based
systems are
often adopted by businesses on a gradual basis, either for new
facilities, or initially for a limited user group such as a
functional department. Accordingly, many businesses are
installing voice communications systems that allow them to
migrate to IP over time. For these businesses, it is critical
that their
IP-based
systems are able to interoperate with their existing telephony
and data infrastructure. It is also critical that their
IP-based
systems be
scalable so that they can grow along with their business without
the need to change existing telephony systems or retrain staff.
These systems also need to be flexible enough to operate either
at a central location, where the system will support users in
that location and provide service to users in branch offices, or
be installed at each individual office that a business may have,
or a combination of both.
Initially, cost reductions were the primary reason for the
adoption of converged
IP-based
communications
systems. These cost reductions can include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the reduction or elimination of long distance and local toll
charges;
|
|
|
|
|
|
lower network maintenance expenses since physical moves,
additions and changes can be handled centrally in an
IP-based
network;
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
decreased network management staff requirements since both voice
and data communications are carried on a single network; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lower cabling costs in new building construction since the same
cable carries both voice and data communications.
|
|
|
Businesses are now looking beyond cost savings to the
productivity benefits, improved customer interaction and other
business process improvements that
IP-based
communications
can offer. Adopting a converged
IP-based
communications
network allows businesses to distribute voice, video and data to
any part of their network, permitting employees who are working
from a branch office or from home or those who are mobile, to
access business software applications as though they were in the
office. This accessibility is enhanced by new software
applications that provide employees with the ability to detect
the presence and availability of a colleague, team, supplier or
customer on the network and allow access to software
applications that facilitate audio and video conferencing and
unified communications. Businesses also see opportunities to
more efficiently manage human resources by allowing contact
center staff, technical support and other personnel to work from
home, branch offices or from remote locations around the world.
Additionally, businesses can use
IP-based
communications
to enhance their business continuity plans by providing
employees with access to information and services from remote
locations.
IP-based
communications allow businesses to implement
hot-desking,
whereby an employee who is not regularly in an office or who
travels between office locations, can access their personalized
features, such as
pre-programmed
speed
dial keys and voicemail, from any telephone that is associated
with a
hot-desk.
Additional business process opportunities arise with the
convergence of fixed and mobile communications that is possible
with IP-based communications . Worker mobility gives rise to a
number of challenges and opportunities for businesses. For
example, employees who are frequently out of their offices rely
extensively on their cellular phones, but these phones can be
costly and do not give the employees access to centralized
services such as office voicemail. Businesses are concerned
about the cost of airtime and long distance charges of cellular
devices, particularly when they are used within company
premises. Mobile workers are also frustrated with the need to
use multiple devices (as opposed to one phone that could be used
in the car, the office and at home) and the burden of managing
multiple voicemail accounts. Businesses are seeking
communications solutions that integrate fixed, wireless and
mobile networks in order to provide workers with advanced
IP-based
features from
their mobile devices and remote locations.
As businesses make their IP migration decisions based on the
potential for business process improvements, they are also
looking for advanced software applications and functionality
specific to their particular industry. Vendors of
IP-based
communications
solutions that are able to offer software applications that are
tailored to the specific needs of the customers industry
will benefit from new, typically
higher-margin,
software
revenue streams.
Our Competitive Strengths
Our key competitive strengths include the following:
Focus on
IP-based
communications solutions.
We made the strategic decision to
invest heavily in the development of
IP-based
communications
solutions over the last five years. We invested the necessary
capital, and absorbed the resulting operating losses, to finance
the development of
IP-based
communications
solutions at a time when the majority of our revenues were still
based on the sale of legacy systems. As a result of our focus on
the
IP-based
communications market, we believe we now have one of the
broadest portfolios of
IP-based
communications
solutions in the industry. We also have one of the
industrys highest ratios of
IP-based
product
shipments to that of legacy products, with over 95% of our
system shipments being IP platforms and 86% of our product
revenues coming from
IP-based
solutions for
the year ended April 30, 2006. Synergy has predicted that
revenue from legacy
circuit-switched
telephony systems will decline at a compound annual rate of
40.9% from 2005 until 2009. Since only 5% of our product
shipments and 14% of our product revenues in the year ended
April 30, 2006 were derived from sales of legacy systems,
we are better positioned than many of our competitors to
withstand the expected further decline in the market for legacy
systems.
65
Interoperable, scalable and flexible solutions that enable IP
adoption.
Our
IP-based
communications
solutions allow our customers to migrate part or all of their
voice communications towards a converged
IP-based
solution at
their own pace and not be forced to discard their investment in
legacy systems or change to a particular vendors data
infrastructure. This gradual migration is possible because our
IP-based
communications
solutions are compatible with industry standards and can
interoperate with most voice and data networks. Our
IP-based
communications
platforms and gateways can scale from as few as 10 users to as
many as 65,000 users in a single network configuration. In
developing our applications we use open standards and
communications protocols that allow for the seamless integration
of converged voice, video and data applications.
Broad software capabilities that enable business process
improvements.
Our solutions are increasingly based on
software which enhances the value of the hardware offering to
our customers. In addition, our solutions are differentiated by
a broad set of packaged software applications that help our
customers optimize business processes, whether addressing the
needs of the individual, a work group or the business as a
whole. Our range of packaged software offerings includes
applications for contact centers, mobility, teleworking,
presence and collaboration, voice messaging, unified
communications, video conferencing and network management.
Desktop portfolio focused on the user experience.
Our
wired and wireless desktop devices are designed to present
advanced desktop devices to the user and to address their
specific needs regardless of whether they are in the office, at
home or traveling. Our desktop products have been recognized for
their innovation, ease of use, industrial design and
functionality.
Communications solutions tailored to the needs of specific
industries.
We offer solutions that are designed
specifically to meet the needs of particular industries and
markets such as education, government, healthcare, hospitality
and retail. We have made significant investments in developing
our understanding of the unique business requirements of our
target markets and translating that knowledge into specific
solutions. Examples of this industry expertise include a low
cost hospitality IP telephone designed specifically for hotel
guestrooms; a virtual concierge software application that serves
as an
in-room
butler at
five star properties; a retail
point-of-sale
IP phone;
and a student outreach solution that provides direct
communication between teachers and parents. As a result, we have
established significant market share in these target industries.
We are extending our focus to address other markets such as the
financial services industry.
Leadership in small and medium-sized business market.
We
have been recognized for our leadership in the small and
medium-sized
business
market (fewer than 100 users), most recently by InfoTech as the
largest provider of
IP-based
communications
solutions to this market in the United States in 2005. In the
United Kingdom, MZA, a market research firm, recognized us
as the leading provider of IP desktop communications solutions
in the small business market (fewer than 100 users) and the
second largest provider in the
medium-sized
business
market (fewer than 250 users) for 2005. With our brand
recognition and the scalability of our
IP-based
communications
solutions, we believe we are well positioned to expand our focus
and addressable market from small and
medium-sized
businesses
to large enterprises. We now have many large enterprise
customers, the largest of which requires us to support as many
as 40,000 users.
Large, integrated distribution and strategic partner
network.
We have developed a global sales and distribution
network with our channel partners and have formed a network of
strategic partnerships and alliances. We believe that our
channel partner network enables us to reach markets around the
world cost effectively. We have substantial distribution
capabilities in North America and the United Kingdom, and we are
increasing our distribution presence in other regions. Our
distribution network consists of over 1,400 channel
partners across more than 90 countries. Where appropriate,
we assist our channel partners with our sales force and service
organization. We also support our channel partners in their
sales activities through our channel managers, systems
engineers, technical account managers and sales administrators
and offer them a variety of services and software tools to
assist them both before and after a sale. We supplement our
distribution network through a variety of joint-selling and
cross-selling initiatives with our
66
strategic partners, resulting in increased sales and enhanced
brand recognition. Our strategic partner network also enables us
to further improve the functionality and features of our
solutions through joint research and development activities. We
have entered into strategic alliances for the provision of
certain converged networks with Hewlett-Packard and Foundry
Networks. At the software applications level, we have entered
into an agreement with Microsoft to integrate Microsoft Office
Live Communications Server and Microsoft Office Communicator
applications with our
Mitel Live Business Gateway
. This
interoperability will allow our customers to access our call
processing features from within the Microsoft Office system and
enhances our messaging and contact center applications by
allowing Microsofts applications to show presence
and availability.
Our Strategy
Our strategy is to build from our leading position in the small
and
medium-sized
business market to also attract large enterprise customers,
increase our market share and generate attractive returns for
our shareholders. To accomplish these objectives, we intend to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to expand our market focus through our highly
scalable solutions
. We have established a leading position
in the small and
medium-sized
business
market. We continue to expand our market focus beyond small and
medium-sized
businesses
by building on and replicating this success in the large
enterprise market given the ability of our solutions to scale up
to 65,000 users in a single network configuration. In order to
target large enterprise customers, we intend to continue to
invest in our brand awareness and to use our sales force and
service organization to complement our channel partners
capabilities and enable us to fully address the complex
requirements of these larger organizations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase our focus on software applications.
Our packaged
software applications have become key components of our
IP-based
communications
solutions and differentiate us from many of our competitors.
These software applications can be sold either as
stand-alone
products or
as part of an overall solution. As a result, we are able to
focus our sales and marketing activities on addressing the
complete needs of a customer, to propose a specific application
for a particular purpose or a combination of both. These
applications provide recurring revenues from license and
maintenance fees. To enhance and differentiate our solutions we
expect to continue to increase our research and development
focus on software applications, such as fixed-mobile convergence
(which allows for the pairing of mobile wireless telephones and
office extensions), presence functionality (which, through the
use of an icon, indicates the status and availability of an
individual on any network) and our messaging products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provide a gradual migration path to IP for our customers and
those of our competitors.
Our
IP-based
solutions are
designed for interoperability with our legacy systems and we
will continue to offer our customers, and our competitors
customers, a seamless and gradual migration path from their
legacy voice systems to our converged voice, video and data
communications solutions. We intend to continue to offer
innovative, high quality products to help our customers
transition to a converged
IP-based
communications
system at their own pace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expand our geographic presence and distribution capabilities.
We are strategically expanding our geographic presence to
position ourselves for the growing global demand for IP-based
communications solutions. We currently have offices in
17 countries and more than 1,400 channel partners
operating in over 90 countries. Our near-term focus is to
build upon our current geographic presence, particularly in
North America where we have recently invested in new customer
demonstration facilities, secured a major new distributor and
recruited a number of senior industry sales executives. We will
also consider expansion into emerging growth markets on a
case-by-case basis, particularly where our customer
opportunities justify the establishment of a local presence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broaden and deepen our strategic partnerships and
alliances.
Our customers require solutions that are cost
effective, specific to their industry and that can provide them
with a competitive
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
advantage. We intend to continue to attract and recruit new
strategic partners and to establish new strategic alliances to
provide us with access to customer relationships, to cost
effectively provide opportunities in new target markets, to
enhance our brand recognition and to strengthen our solutions by
adding new features and functionality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continue to leverage our operating model.
Our operating
model creates two opportunities for leverage. The first
opportunity is to increase our gross margins. We believe that
with the strength of our software applications portfolio, our
business will continue to evolve towards a higher proportion of
software license and maintenance revenues with correspondingly
higher margins. We believe that our software licensing process
will facilitate this transition because it is sophisticated, yet
simple for our channel partners to use. We also intend to
increase our gross margins with a continued focus on product
cost reduction through design changes, strategic supplier
management and innovative distribution strategies. The second
opportunity for leverage is the potential to grow our revenues
at a pace that exceeds the rate of growth of our selling,
general and administrative and research and development
expenses. We believe this is possible due largely to the
benefits of scale that we expect to leverage in our operating
model.
|
Our Solutions
We have designed our IP solutions to perform as pure IP-based
communications solutions and also as gateways to facilitate
interoperability with our customers existing voice
infrastructure and legacy devices.
Our product portfolio consists of communications platforms and
gateways (both of which manage call processing), desktop devices
(such as phones, conference units and operator consoles) and
software applications (software which typically enables
specialized functionality such as messaging, teleworking and
collaboration). We complement these products with a broad range
of services.
We have won numerous awards for our product innovation,
industrial design and performance. Some of these awards include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel 3300 IP Communications Platform (ICP)
: Rated
Best IP-PBX Value, Mid-Size systems by Miercom (2005)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel
SX-200
IP
Communications Platform (ICP)
: Rated Best in
Test by Miercom (2005)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel Your Assistant
: Communications Convergence, Visions
of Convergence, Product of the Year (2004)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel Navigator
: Internet Telephony Product of the Year
(2005); and Frost & Sullivan Award for Technology Innovation
(2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel Customer Interaction Solutions/ Mitel Contact Center
Solutions
: Customer Value Enhancement Award Contact Center
Industry (2004); Customer Interaction Solutions IP Contact
Center Technology Pioneer Award (2005); and TMC Labs Innovation
Award (2005)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel Messaging Server
: Internet Telephony Product of the
Year (2005)
|
We have made significant investments in the development of new
IP-based communications solutions to meet the changing needs of
our customers and their migration to IP-based communication
systems. Our commitment to the development of our IP solutions
has resulted in an IP communications portfolio that we believe
is among the broadest and most sophisticated in the industry
today.
Platforms and
Gateways
Our IP communications products include the following platforms
and gateways:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
Mitel 3300 IP Communications Platform
(ICP). The
Mitel 3300 ICP
, the
cornerstone of our
IP-based
communications
product portfolio, is a converged communications platform that
supports our suite of advanced call processing and related
applications and IP-enabled desktop
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
devices. Our call processing software supports over 500
networking and end user features and is available in up to
10 languages. The
Mitel 3300 ICP
has the
flexibility to operate as either a single site, distributed or
hosted solution and interoperates with a customers legacy
infrastructure. The
Mitel 3300 ICP
is scalable to
serve the needs of small and medium businesses with as few as
10 users, and large enterprises with as many as
65,000 users.
|
The diagram below depicts how the
Mitel 3300 ICP
can
be used either for providing call processing features and
functions or, as an applications and services gateway, for the
delivery of advanced applications. The purpose of deploying the
Mitel 3300 ICP with embedded applications and services is to
minimize the number of separate servers that may otherwise be
required and to simplify the management of the applications.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
Mitel 3300 ICP
also acts as an applications and
services gateway, allowing customers access to advanced
applications such as messaging, mobility and teleworking. With
the
Mitel Live Business Gateway
attributes enabled, the
applications and services gateway provides connectivity to
Microsofts Live Communications Server for our solutions
and the legacy infrastructure of competitors. The applications
and services gateway uses open industry standards to
interoperate with our and third party business applications and
devices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For customers with branch offices, we offer the ability to
either implement a
Mitel 3300 ICP
at each location
or allow users at a remote site to receive a hosted service from
a
Mitel 3300 ICP
situated elsewhere in the network
(or a combination of both options). Those customers using a
hosted model have access to the same software applications and
services as those situated at the office where the
Mitel
3300 ICP
physically resides. The
Mitel
3300 ICP
can also be implemented as a survivable
gateway at a branch office such that if the network to the
office from which they
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
are being hosted becomes unavailable, then the local
Mitel
3300 ICP
will provide the same services seamlessly
until the network connection is restored. We are able to
distribute the features, software applications and services
normally only available at larger corporate offices to any part
of the network, addressing the communications challenges facing
organizations with decentralized operations and personnel. This
approach also provides alternative network configurations for
customers concerned with disaster recovery and business
continuity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel Enterprise Manager. Our enterprise management applications
allow our customers to control their network of
Mitel
3300 ICP
s and associated applications and devices.
These applications allow our customers to monitor and control
telecommunication spending as well as network monitoring, alarm
handling and troubleshooting. Our enterprise management
applications include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Manager.
The Enterprise Manager suite provides
a single management interface to monitor and manage all of the
activities of the
Mitel 3300 ICP
and perform
day-to-day management tasks helping control costs by delivering
simplified PC-based administration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Management.
The Remote Management suite allows the
maintainer to access network and system information and resolve
issues remotely
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Integrated Management Applications.
The Integrated
Management Applications suite provides the ability to analyze
the IP networks capability to support IP communications.
Voice quality metrics and diagnostics can be used to test the
network capabilities and to help troubleshoot potential
issues
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technology Interfaces.
Recognizing that some customers
may have specialized requirements beyond our packaged software
products, we offer a wide range of technology interfaces for
specific enhancements. Open interfaces allow integration to
third party management solutions, such as those from Microsoft
and Hewlett Packard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel
SX-200
ICP.
The
Mitel
SX-200
ICP
specifically addresses the North American market and provides
the features required by the smaller business market and the
hospitality industry. The
Mitel
SX-200
ICP
targets
organizations with up to 600 users either at a single location
or in multiple locations and it supports networking and
interoperability with legacy
Mitel
SX-200
systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mitel 3600 Hosted IP Key System
. The
Mitel 3600 Hosted IP Key System
is designed for
businesses with fewer than 20 employees. This product is sold
through service providers or channel partners who wish to offer
a hosted solution and eliminate the need for the platform to be
located and managed at the end-users office. The
Mitel 3600
enables the features of a key telephone
system to be delivered as a service and works with our
Mitel
IP Phones
.
|
Desktop Portfolio:
Our desktop portfolio includes a broad range of telephones,
consoles, conference units, soft phones (a software-only
implementation of an IP telephone that runs on a personal
computer) and ancillary devices that support our IP-based
communications systems. We have been recognized by a number of
third parties as a leader in the design of desktop devices,
which have been acknowledged for their ease of use, aesthetics,
high quality and functionality.
70
Our IP-based desktop products interoperate with all of our
IP-based communications platforms and software applications.
These desktop products allow users access to advanced telephony
features and services such as integrated web browsing, enhanced
directory management, and visual voicemail, regardless of
whether they are in the office, at home or travelling. Our
latest desktop devices provide the capability to customize the
displays for particular industries or for customer specific
requirements. This customization can be undertaken by a
customer, a channel partner or can be performed by our
professional services organization.
We also provide
in-building
wireless
devices which provide access to the majority of the features of
the
Mitel 3300 ICP
.
Applications
We offer a broad range of
IP-based
packaged
software applications that are used by businesses across a
variety of industries. We also offer customized software
applications to businesses requiring highly tailored solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Center Applications.
A contact center is
generally a dedicated function within a business that typically
serves as an inside sales help desk, providing customer support,
lead generation, emergency response, telephone answering
service, inbound response and outbound telemarketing. We provide
a suite of
web-based
applications for streamlining contact center management and
reporting. Customers can therefore choose to implement those
elements that are most relevant to their business needs. Our
contact center applications provide multimedia functionality
incorporating routing of an inquiry to the first available agent
or the agent that has been idle for the longest period.
Visibility of the presence and availability of colleagues or
resources can be provided by integration with Microsoft Live
Communications Server using the Mitel Live Business Gateway to
facilitate first call resolution. An inquiry can be associated
with an incoming call,
e-mail,
fax or webchat.
Contact center agents are fully supported across a centralized
or
multi-site
environment including home working.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wireless Telephony Applications.
We offer wireless
telephony applications for
in-building
mobility as
well as to enable the seamless convergence of
in-building
wired or
wireless networks with mobile
cellular-based
networks. Our
in-building
wireless
applications provide roaming users with the majority of the
features available on a desktop device including
extension-to-extension
dialing, attendant functions, voice mail and messaging as well
as external calling. We use wireless devices that work with
other major manufacturers wireless access points allowing
customers the use of their existing access point investment for
in-building mobile telephony. The
Mitel 3300 ICP
can
also pair a cellular phone with an office extension or any other
telephone such that each device will ring simultaneously if the
office extension is called. This pairing significantly reduces
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the number of calls that are missed. When a call is answered on
a cellular phone it is still presented at the office extension,
which means that by pressing a single key on the telephone, the
call can be moved from the cellular phone to the office
extension. This process can also be achieved in reverse, so that
an employee who may need to leave for a meeting, can transfer
the call from the office extension to the cellular device. This
feature reduces cellular long distance and air time charges and
enables the user to operate with one phone number whether in the
office, at home or traveling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video Applications.
Our video applications and related
devices provide businesses access to video conferencing at the
desktop or for dedicated conference rooms. Our video
conferencing solutions are easy to use and a conference call can
be established by simply dialing the number or extension of the
remote party from an IP telephone and then, once the telephone
call is established, pressing a single key on the handset to
transform the audio call into a video conference. Our video
applications and related devices also incorporate collaboration
tools, including those from Microsoft Office, that allow users
to share computer applications during conferences. Our solutions
can simultaneously support eight separate locations involved in
the video conference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collaboration Tools.
We offer a
computer-based
collaboration, presence and contact management application
called
Your Assistant
that can optionally include a
softphone. The softphone provides a number of important features
of a Mitel desktop telephone on a personal computer, at the
users desk or from any location around the world where
there is access to the Internet.
Your Assistant
interacts
with the users contact database and offers secure instant
messaging capabilities, video conferencing, knowledge management
(automatic retrieval of pertinent files associated with the name
and number of the caller) and enables simplified drag and
drop call and conference call initiation by moving, with a
computer mouse, the name of a contact from a list or directory
into the communications window.
Your Assistant
also
enables the simple sharing of presentations, documents or
spreadsheets and also offers the ability to create a virtual
white board on each users computer screen for the purposes
of creating drawings, diagrams or for making notes. In addition,
a video conference can be established with a non-user of
Your
Assistant
by publishing the name of an Internet web page
associated with the conference call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Speech Enabled Messaging, Unified Messaging, Integrated
Messaging and Voice Mail.
We offer a
speech-enabled
application called
Speech Server Unified Messaging
that
gives users the ability to control their telephony functions
through
voice-activated
commands.
Speech Server Unified Messaging
also supports
conversational speech recognition, recognizing entire sentences
and not simply single words, allowing users to answer or forward
voice and
e-mail
messages with voice or text responses.
NuPoint Messenger
,
our branded integrated messaging application,
provides a scalable and reliable way to relay, store, and
retrieve voice messages using either a phone, fax machine, pager
or personal computer.
NuPoint Messenger
also allows users
to have their calls routed to them while they are travelling, or
access to their voice or fax messages from their personal
computer.
NuPoint Messenger
provides a high availability
and highly scalable solution, which can be suitable as a carrier
or large enterprise solution. Our
6510 Messaging
Server
product allows businesses to mix and match the
requirements of individual employees by supporting both unified
messaging and traditional voicemail on the same platform.
Messaging Server
supports Microsoft Outlook/ Exchange,
IBM Lotus/ Domino and Novell GroupWise messaging environments.
Our messaging solutions also interoperate with Microsoft Live
Communications Server.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teleworking.
Our
IP-based
teleworker
solution enables users to make secure and encrypted IP phone
calls from their home office or any remote office by extending
the features and functionality of an office telephone over the
Internet. As a result, long distance charges can be
significantly reduced or in some cases eliminated. As an option,
our Teleworker telephone can support an integral module that
allows the telephone to access the public switched telephone
network for making local calls and calls to emergency services
and to receive incoming calls. Customers can download reports
that provide detailed usage statistics on teleworker activity.
This information provides return on investment
feedback as a means of itemizing savings.
|
|
|
72
Our Legacy Telephony Communication Solutions
Our legacy
circuit-switched
telephony portfolio includes the
Mitel
SX-2000
, a fully
featured traditional communications platform that addresses
businesses with up to 20,000 users. This system provides
extensive features and functionality, allows individual elements
of the system to be distributed throughout an organization, can
support redundant hardware and software to minimize system
downtime and supports networking between systems, based on
industry standards, for seamless voice communications between
separate sites. The
Mitel
SX-200
is a
traditional
circuit-switched
telephony platform, with a number of key telephony features,
that addresses single site and small
multi-site
businesses
with fewer than 400 users. Both the
Mitel
SX-2000
and the
Mitel
SX-200
are
complemented by a portfolio of digital telephones and a suite of
applications. We offer a simple migration path to
IP communications for customers with
Mitel
SX-2000
and
Mitel
SX-200
implementations using the
Mitel 3300 ICP
and
Mitel
SX-200
ICP
.
Our Services
We complement our product offerings with a broad range of
services. Our services are delivered by both our channel
partners and us and extend from initial planning and design
through to implementation and support. Planning services include
needs assessments, site surveys, system configuration, network
design and project management. Implementation services include
IP-based
system and
application implementations, advanced messaging implementations
and
multi-site
installations. Additional services include resource
coordination, project management, contract administration,
performance management, customized applications development,
technical support services,
long-term
systems
management service, and training. Our support options are
flexible to meet the varied needs of our customers, including
warranty coverage and maintenance agreements. Our service
offerings enable us to maintain and grow our relationship with
our customers and provide us with recurring revenues.
Historically, legacy equipment maintenance was focused on
hardware. Dealing with a service concern typically entailed the
dispatch of a technician to the customer site for diagnosis and
repair or replacement of defective hardware. In recent years, as
our product mix has transitioned towards
IP-based
communications
solutions, the nature and delivery of our service offerings has
changed. Today, our product offerings are increasingly
software-based.
This
fact, combined with efficiencies enabled from significant
systems and process investments, means that diagnosis (and in
some cases, the resolution) of customer outages or concerns can
often be done remotely, more quickly and at a lower cost.
Customers
We have shipped over 230,000 systems supporting the needs of
more than 20 million users to customers in over 90
countries during the past 25 years. Our largest end-user
customer represented no more than 4% of our revenues in fiscal
2004, fiscal 2005 and in fiscal 2006. Our
end-user
customer base
reflects our historical strength in the small and
medium-sized
business
sector as well as the addition of recent large enterprise
customers. Our largest deployment can support as many as
40,000 users.
The following chart provides examples of our end-user customer
base categorized by our key vertical markets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Education
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chicago Public Schools
|
|
Glasgow Schools
|
|
Michigan Technological University
|
|
|
New York City Department of Education
|
|
University of Ottawa
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Butterfield Bank
|
|
Coast Capital
|
|
Eastwest Bank
|
|
|
New York Life Insurance
|
|
Rabo Bank (U.K.)
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arlington County
|
|
Australian Customs and Immigration
|
|
Canada Revenue Agency
|
|
|
Foreign and Commonwealth Office (U.K.)
|
|
HM Revenue and Customs
|
|
Orange County Vector Control District
|
|
|
|
Healthcare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hotel-Dieu Hospital
|
|
MedQuist
|
|
Mohave Mental Health Clinic
|
|
|
Queens Long Island Medical Group
|
|
Sutter Health
|
|
University College London Hospitals
|
|
|
|
Hospitality
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Choice Hotels
|
|
Ginn Clubs and Resorts
|
|
Hilton UK Hotels Ltd.
|
|
|
Intercontinental Hotels
|
|
Marriott
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arbys
|
|
Auchan
|
|
Charlotte Russe
|
|
|
Claremont and May
|
|
CompUSA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canary Wharf
|
|
Courier Express
|
|
Foundry Networks
|
|
|
JCB
|
|
LaFarge (France)
|
|
Tele 2 Versatel (Netherlands)
|
Our
IP-based
solutions
have been used by a wide variety of customers. The following
case studies provide examples of our customers and why they use
our solutions.
Customer Needs:
CompUSA is one of the leading retailers
and resellers of personal
computer-related
hardware and software products and services. CompUSA operates
approximately 226 stores in 90 cities in the United States.
CompUSA was looking to achieve
lower-cost
communications and the ability to move voice, data and video on
a single
easily-managed
network capable of implementing more advanced features.
The Solution:
Because of our focus on the retail market,
CompUSA elected to implement one of our solutions that included
the
Mitel 3300 ICP
and
Mitel IP Phones.
This
resulted in
low-cost
and reliable communications integrating the stores and
headquarters, connecting between the stores and linking the
company with customers and its many suppliers. Our solution
allows CompUSA to better serve its own customers, enhance the
productivity of its staff and improve dealings with suppliers.
JCB
Customer Needs:
JCB is a manufacturer of construction
equipment. JCBs North American headquarters houses sales
and marketing office staff, a call center, warehouse employees
and a manufacturing shop floor. JCB needed a flexible, scalable
system that could handle its diverse communications needs and
anticipated growth.
The Solution:
To address their needs, JCB selected a
wide-range
of our
solutions, including the
Mitel 3300 ICP
,
Mitel
Contact Centre Solution
,
Mitel Teleworker Solution
,
and
Mitel IP Phones
and wireless phones. This solution
provided them with automated 24/7 contact center capabilities
with integration to customer relationship management, universal
messaging to integrate voice and electronic message management
and to seamlessly tie in remote and mobile employees to a
central phone system.
74
JCB was able to reduce its telecommunications costs by half and
realize cost savings from improved workflow, employee
productivity gains and a reduction in system maintenance.
Canary Wharf
Customer Needs:
Canary Wharf in Londons Docklands
comprises a Grade A commercial business and leisure
complex. Canary Wharf is the location of a number of prestigious
tenants. Because of the
ever-changing
nature of
the
86-acre
complex, it
is essential that any data or telephony infrastructure be
resilient, scalable and flexible.
The Solution:
Historically, telephony at Canary Wharf had
been based around the
Mitel
SX-2000
, which
offers
feature-rich
voice communications, centralized management, high levels of
scalability and seamless networking capabilities. Canary
Wharfs migration to an
IP-based
communications
system started with a new site housing the complexs Estate
Control Center which is responsible for monitoring the entire
complex. A
Mitel 3300 ICP
was chosen by the
management of Canary Wharf for its enhanced scalability and
flexibility and the
Mitel Contact Center Solution
was
implemented to provide the
help-desk
team with a
way of managing call flows more efficiently using the advanced
functionality of IP telephony.
Courier Express
Customer Needs:
Courier Express, a U.S. based company, is
a leading provider of freight and warehousing services,
consisting of a
six-office,
multi-warehouse
business that operates continuously. The company needed to
operate as a unified entity rather than as multiple regional
offices. Their old legacy phone system was one of the key
obstacles to achieving that goal, as each location had a
separate standalone phone system connected to an individual
telephone exchange not allowing Courier Express to function
effectively as a
multi-site
operation.
The Solution:
Courier Express implemented a solution
comprising the
Mitel 3300 ICP
,
Mitel Teleworker
Solution
,
Mitel IP Phones
and
Mitel Contact Center
Solution
which enabled it to centralize its operations.
Courier Express now enjoys significant cost savings on calls
between locations and functions as a single, seamless operation
that can easily support new employees and
home-based
sales staff.
MedQuist
Customer Needs:
MedQuist, a New Jersey-based company, is
one of the leading national providers of medical transcription
and healthcare documentation management services. MedQuist
wanted to reduce cost and increase employee productivity by
making it possible for more than 1,000 employees to work from
home. MedQuist also required a solution that would help them to
streamline business costs, improve customer service and provide
management reporting.
The Solution:
MedQuist selected a number of our solutions
including the
Mitel Teleworker Solution
,
Mitel Your
Assistant
, the
Mitel 3300 ICP
and
Mitel IP
Phones
. These solutions have provided over
1,000 employees with the tools necessary to successfully
work from home. MedQuist estimates that our solutions will allow
it to dramatically reduce costs in many key areas. The
Teleworker Solution and
Your Assistant
applications will
enable MedQuist to interact with employees, monitor their
progress and maintain cohesive communications. Additionally, the
integration with
Your Assistant
gives MedQuist and its
employees a virtual and visual presence and availability at all
times.
Sales and Marketing
Our sales and marketing strategy leverages our own offices in
17 countries with the local presence and customer
relationships of over 1,200 channel partners servicing
customers in more than 90 countries. Product fulfillment
and order logistics for most of our channel partners are
generally performed in the United States and Europe by our
wholesale distributors. During fiscal 2006, our major
distributors included GrayBar Electric Co., Inc., Tech Data
Corporation, Westcon Group, Inc. and, to a lesser extent, Sprint
North Supply, as it transitioned its focus away from the
enterprise market during the year. Our channel
75
partners are supported by our internal teams of channel
managers, systems engineers, technical account managers and
sales administrators. To complement our channel partner network,
we also provide support to independent consultants who focus on
assisting companies with network design, implementation and
vendor selection. We believe our extensive channel partner
network allows us to effectively sell our solutions globally,
without the need to build dedicated
in-house
sales and
service capabilities in every geographic market. We continue to
recruit channel partners with a focus on growing market
coverage, supporting converged solutions, and implementing
applications interoperation.
We do not employ a traditional direct versus indirect strategy,
under which a direct sales team may compete with indirect
channel partners for the same end user sales opportunity.
Instead, our own sales staff work either directly with a
prospective customer or in coordination with a channel partner
in defining the scope, design and implementation of the
solution. These customers can decide to do business directly
with us or through a channel partner. Our sales staff are
directed to operate a
channel-neutral
selling
approach. On a
case-by-case
basis we
may close a sale on a direct basis, while utilizing one of our
channel partners for the purpose of fulfilment and ongoing
support. Conversely, channel partners may bring us sales
opportunities for which they see a greater likelihood of winning
the account if we take a lead role in the selling process.
Our marketing organization employs a comprehensive strategy to
enhance our brand, attract and retain channel partners,
differentiate our product offerings and develop solutions for
specific industry markets. Brand development is conducted
through advertising, media articles, trade conferences, product
placements, analyst relations and web content delivery. Our
channel marketing organization designs and administers incentive
programs targeted at gaining mind share with our channel
partners. Our solutions marketing organization develops
materials and programs for our portfolio of solutions that
provide clear business value to our target customers. Our
vertical marketing team understands the unique business needs
and challenges of our key vertical markets and tailors our
solutions to address those needs. We also operate
16 demonstration centers equipped with our latest
solutions. These centers are used by both our channel partners
and our own staff to demonstrate our solutions to existing and
prospective customers.
As at September 30, 2006, our sales and marketing force
consisted of 382 employees.
Manufacturing and Supply Chain Management
We outsource all of our manufacturing and certain of our supply
chain management and distribution functions. The outsourcing of
these functions allows us to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
focus on the design, development, sales and support of our
products;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
leverage the scale and expertise of specialized contract
manufacturers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reduce manufacturing and supply chain risk;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reduce distribution costs; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
ensure competitive pricing and levels of service.
|
We outsource most of our worldwide manufacturing and repair
operations to BreconRidge, one of the worlds top 50
electronics manufacturing services, or EMS, companies.
BreconRidge specializes in the communications, industrial and
consumer market sectors and provides many services including
design, process and test engineering services, component
sourcing, manufacturing, repair/refurbishment and distribution
services. BreconRidge is ISO 9001 certified and has more than
725,000 square feet of manufacturing capacity in
state-of-the-art
facilities in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and
China. In addition to BreconRidge, we outsource the
manufacturing of a number of our IP platforms to Plexus Corp. of
the United States and certain desktop sets to WKK Technology
Ltd. in China.
The manufacturing of our products has been allocated among these
key suppliers to reduce the risks associated with using a single
supply source and to ensure competitive pricing and levels of
service. This
76
approach also enables us to respond more rapidly to increases in
demand for our products. Our suppliers are responsible for
performing periodic market reviews to validate proposed pricing
actions.
We have an internal operations group which has the
responsibility of managing these contract manufacturing
relationships. Functions performed by our operations group
include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
evaluating, selecting, pricing and negotiating contracts with
EMS suppliers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
monitoring EMS supplier contract manufacturer performance
against established service level agreements;
|
|
|
|
|
|
maintaining the authorized vendor list of component suppliers;
|
|
|
|
|
|
managing finished goods inventory; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
selecting outbound freight partners, shipping methods, remote
stocking strategies and shipping routes.
|
In addition, we retain Lytica Inc., an independent contract
manufacturing consultancy, to assist us in assessing, on a
quarterly basis, if pricing from BreconRidge, Plexus Corp. and
WKK Technology Ltd. is at market rates and if the level of
service obtained from them is comparable to their competitors.
Research and Development
Since 2001, we have invested heavily in
IP-based
product
research and development. This strategy has been based on two
key planning assumptions. First, we believed that the shift in
customer demand towards
IP-based
solutions
would be one of the most significant technology development in
the voice communications industry since digital telephony
displaced analog phone systems in the 1980s. Second, we believed
that the transition to
IP-based
solutions,
when it did happen, would be rapid. Companies who did not
anticipate and proactively plan for this rapid technological
change would miss out on a significant market opportunity,
suffer significant customer and market share losses and damage
their potential for future revenue growth. Our new product
development programs are exclusively focused on developing
IP-based
solutions.
Accordingly, we have been executing an aggressive research and
development investment strategy, designed to position us with
one of the broadest portfolios of
IP-based
communications
solutions in the industry. This strategy has been reflected in
our research and development expense levels, which have ranged
between 11% and 17% of revenues in the period from fiscal 2001
through fiscal 2006 and will continue to be substantial for the
foreseeable future. As a percentage of revenues, this
expenditure has been significantly higher than many of our
competitors. Our investment strategy has positioned us with a
broad range of
feature-rich,
scalable,
standards-based
and
interoperable
IP-based
solutions, that allow us to capitalize on our historical
strength in the small and
medium-sized
business
market, and expand our addressable market to larger enterprise
customers. This strategy has also allowed us to migrate our
product revenues over the past four years, from being
predominantly based on legacy
circuit-switched
technology to 86% IP products in the fiscal year ended
April 30, 2006. As a result, we believe we have minimal
exposure to continued erosion of legacy product revenues.
Our research and development organization is based in Ottawa,
Canada and was comprised of 310 personnel as of
September 30, 2006, almost all of whom are engaged in
IP product design and verification. Research and
development personnel have an average tenure with us of
approximately 9 years, and bring competencies in real time
software, call control, telephony applications and digital
signal processing. Our ratio of software to hardware engineers
is approximately 5:1, reflecting our focus on software in our
core products and our growing suite of applications. We also
leverage outsourced development relationships with a number of
third party software development firms, both for specific
software applications that we may brand as Mitel products and
for
non-mission-critical
development and support. We target a major release cycle for our
key products every six to nine months.
77
The TPC Agreement, as last amended on October 31, 2006 (as
described under Description of Share Capital
Warrants Technology Partnerships Canada
Warrants) requires us to conduct a seven year aggregate of
C$366.5 million worth of research and development over the
seven year period commencing on March 31, 2005, with a
minimum of C$45.8 million per year. We believe that we will
meet all spending requirements under the TPC Agreement. We spent
C$52.5 million on research and development during the year
ended March 31, 2006 and therefore achieved the minimum
requirement during the first year of the seven year period.
Intellectual Property
We have over 650 patents and pending applications in the United
States, Canada and Europe, and in other countries around the
world, covering over 250 inventions. Approximately one
third of our patents and pending applications relate to IP
telephony and collaboration technology, while the balance cover
industrial designs (primarily in connection with our desktop
devices) and our legacy telephony communications solutions.
Within the last five years we have focused our intellectual
property efforts on seeking patent protection for our
IP-based
communications
inventions. In fiscal 2006, for instance, we filed 18 new
patent applications for
IP-based
communications
inventions. We have a number of patents in the areas of
presence, collaboration and mobility communications.
Historically, our strategy has been to rely on our patent
portfolio primarily to counter against any allegations of
infringement on the patents held by our competitors. Given the
strength of our
IP-based
patent
portfolio, we are developing a strategy to leverage these assets
by asserting our rights in certain patented technologies.
Our other intellectual property assets include industrial
designs, trademarks, proprietary software, copyrights, operating
and instruction manuals, trade secrets and confidential business
information.
Our solutions may contain software applications and hardware
components that are either developed and owned by us or licensed
to us by third parties. The majority of the software code
embodied in each of our core call-processing software, IP-based
teleworker software, wireless telephony software applications,
integrated messaging and voicemail software and Microsoft
collaboration interfaces has been developed internally and is
owned by us.
In some cases, we have obtained a non-exclusive license from
third parties to use, integrate and distribute with our products
certain packaged software, as well as customized software. This
third-party software is either integrated into our own software
application or is sold as a separate self-contained application,
such as voicemail or unified messaging applications. The
majority of the software that we license is packaged software
that is made generally available and has not been customized for
our specific purpose. If any of these third-party licenses were
to terminate, our options would be to either license a
functionally equivalent software application or develop the
functionally equivalent software application ourselves.
We have also entered into a number of
non-exclusive
license
agreements with third parties to use, integrate and distribute
certain operating systems, digital signal processors and
semiconductor components as part of our
IP-based
communications
platforms and
IP-based
desktop portfolio. If any of these third-party licenses were to
terminate, we would need to license functionally equivalent
technology from another supplier.
It is our general practice to include confidentiality and
non-disclosure
provisions in the agreements entered into with our employees,
consultants, manufacturers,
end-users,
channel
partners and others to attempt to limit access to and
distribution of our proprietary information. In addition, it is
our practice to enter into agreements with employees that
include an assignment to us of all intellectual property
developed in the course of their employment.
78
Employees
As of September 30, 2006, we had 1,553 employees of
whom 807 were in Canada, 275 were in the United States and 471
were in the United Kingdom and other countries. We had 1,849,
1,689 and 1,652 employees at the end of fiscal year 2004,
fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006, respectively. In
connection with our transition to an IP-based communications
company, we have streamlined and centralized our
back-end
processes to
improve operational efficiencies. We have taken significant
steps in hiring new or cross training existing technical staff
to meet the needs of the IP-based communications market. Annual
revenues per employee during fiscal 2004, fiscal 2005 and fiscal
2006 were $184,000, $203,000 and $234,000, respectively,
reflecting our continuing focus on improving operational
efficiency.
We have a
long-standing
positive working relationship with the International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers with respect to approximately
100 U.S. field technicians who perform installation,
maintenance and systems changes. Our current contract with this
union expires after September 30, 2007, with options to
renew for additional
one-year
periods.
We believe that our future success depends in large part on our
ability to attract and retain highly skilled managerial,
research and development, and sales and marketing personnel. Our
compensation programs include opportunities for regular annual
salary reviews, bonuses and stock options. Over 60% of our
employees are also common shareholders and over 95% of our
employees hold options to acquire our common shares. We believe
we have been successful in our efforts to recruit qualified
employees and believe relations with our employees are generally
positive.
Competition
Historically, our competition has come primarily from two groups
of vendors. The first group consists of traditional telephony
products companies such as Avaya, Nortel, Alcatel, Siemens and
InterTel. When competing against these companies we generally
focus on the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the quality of our IP product portfolio and richness of our
software applications;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the useability of our software and their application to vertical
markets;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the interoperability with equipment supplied by other vendors
and with legacy circuit-switched network equipment;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the scalability and flexibility of our architecture, and the
ease of deployment in either a
centrally-managed,
remotely-distributed
or
hosted architecture;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the strength of our strategic alliances; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ease of doing business for our channel partners.
|
The second group of competitors consists of data product
companies such as Cisco and 3Com, who, in recent years, have
expanded their offerings to include
IP-based
voice
communications products. When competing against these companies,
we focus on our ability to migrate to
IP-based
solutions at a
pace that makes sense for the customer and the richness of our
software applications, in addition to the other factors listed
above.
We also compete with a number of new startup companies who are
focused on the
IP-based
communications market. We compete against these new entrants by
leveraging our size, our extensive channel network, our large
installed based, our global presence and our deep knowledge of
telephony built on over 25 years of developing telephony
solutions.
79
Properties
We do not own any real property. The following table outlines
significant properties that we currently lease:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Purpose
|
|
|
(in square feet)
|
|
|
date of Lease
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ottawa, Canada
|
|
|
Corporate Head Office
|
|
|
|
512,000
|
|
|
|
February 15, 2011
|
|
|
Caldicot, United Kingdom
|
|
|
U.K. and EMEA Regional Headquarters
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
March 9, 2021
|
|
|
Ottawa, Canada
|
|
|
Office and Manufacturing Facilities
(1)
|
|
|
|
160,000
|
|
|
|
February 15, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Sublet to BreconRidge until August 31, 2006 See
Certain Relationships and Related Party
Transactions BreconRidge Manufacturing Solutions
Corporation.
|
The Ottawa facilities are leased from Brookstreet Research Park
Corporation, a company controlled by Dr. Matthews, under
terms and conditions reflecting what management believed were
prevailing market conditions at the time the lease was entered
into. See Certain Relationships and Related Party
Transactions Brookstreet Research Park
Corporation.
In addition to these significant properties, we also operate a
number of regional sales offices throughout the world from
leased facilities totaling, in the aggregate, approximately
750,000 square feet, including offices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
throughout the United States (including New York City, Atlanta,
Chicago, Boston, Orlando (Florida), Costa Mesa (California),
Herndon (Virginia) and Waukesha (Wisconsin));
|
|
|
|
|
|
throughout Canada (including Toronto, Montreal, Calgary,
Winnipeg, Burnaby (British Columbia) and Halifax);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
throughout the United Kingdom (including London and Strathclyde
(Scotland));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
throughout Continental Europe, the Middle East and Africa
(including France, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Saudi
Arabia, Dubai and South Africa);
|
|
|
|
|
|
in
Asia-Pacific
(including Hong Kong and Beijing (China), Singapore and Sydney
(Australia)); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
in Mexico City.
|
We believe that these facilities are adequate for our immediate
needs and that additional space would be available if needed to
accommodate any expansion.
Legal Proceedings
We are involved in legal proceedings, as well as demands, claims
and threatened litigation, that arise in the normal course of
our business. In particular, as is common in our industry, we
have received notices alleging that we infringe patents
belonging to various third parties. These notices are dealt with
in accordance with our internal procedures, which include
assessing the merits of each notice and seeking, where
appropriate, a business resolution. Where a business resolution
cannot be reached, litigation may be necessary. The ultimate
outcome of any litigation is uncertain, and regardless of
outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on our business
because of defense costs, negative publicity, diversion of
management resources and other factors. Our failure to obtain
any necessary license or other rights on commercially reasonable
terms, or otherwise, or litigation arising out of intellectual
property claims could materially adversely affect our business.
As of the date of this prospectus, except for the items outlined
below, we are not party to any litigation that we believe is
material to our business.
On June 23, 2006, one of our competitors, Avaya Inc., filed
a complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia alleging that we are infringing on certain
of its patents and requesting damages (treble damages in respect
of alleged willful infringement of the patents), injunctive
relief, attorneys fees, costs and expenses, and such
further relief against us as the court deems just and proper. On
September 8, 2006 we filed a defense to Avayas
complaint and a counterclaim alleging that
80
Avaya is infringing on certain of our patents and requesting
damages (treble damages in respect of alleged willful
infringement of the patents), injunctive relief, attorneys
fees, costs and expenses, and such further relief as the court
deems just and proper. Avaya has also filed a complaint in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
seeking a declaratory judgment that certain of our patents are
not being infringed by them or are invalid.
Neither we nor Avaya have asserted or quantified any of the
precise monetary damages allegedly suffered in these complaints.
Consequently, we are not able to determine the amount of damages
that might be awarded against us or Avaya, or whether we would
be able to continue to use the technology that Avaya alleges
infringes the patents at suit. We are vigorously defending our
company against these complaints. See Risk
Factors Our business may be harmed if we infringe
intellectual property rights of third parties.
There is currently a motion pending to certify a class action in
the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that would cover a certain
number of our Canadian employees who were terminated in
connection with the restructuring activities in the quarter
ending October 31, 2006. We are in the process of assessing
this motion.
Corporate Structure
We were incorporated under the
Canada Business Corporations
Act
on January 12, 2001 by Zarlink (formerly Mitel
Corporation) in order to reorganize its communications systems
division in contemplation of the sale of that business to
companies controlled by Dr. Matthews. In a series of
related transactions dated February 16, 2001 and
March 27, 2001, we acquired the Mitel name and
substantially all of the assets and subsidiaries of the Zarlink
communications systems business (other than Canadian real estate
and certain intellectual property assets) from Zarlink. Part of
the intellectual property assets relating to the Zarlink
communications systems business were transferred to Mitel
Knowledge Corporation, a company controlled by
Dr. Matthews, and subsequently transferred to us. The
intellectual property assets relating to the Zarlink
communications systems business that we have not acquired are
licensed to us from Zarlink pursuant to the Intellectual
Property License Agreement described below under Certain
Relationships and Related Party Transactions Zarlink
Semiconductor Inc. Intellectual Property License
Agreement.
81
We carry on our worldwide business directly and through our
subsidiaries. Our material subsidiaries are shown on the chart
below, with the jurisdiction of incorporation in parentheses:
Head and Registered Office
Our head and registered office is located at 350 Legget
Drive, Ottawa, Ontario Canada K2K 2W7 and our telephone
number is
(613)
592-2122.
82
MANAGEMENT
Executive Officers and Directors
The following table sets forth information with respect to our
directors and executive officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and Municipality of Residence
|
|
Age
|
|
|
Position
|
|
Principal Occupation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Terence H.
Matthews
(1)
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Mitel;
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board of March Networks
|
|
|
|
Donald W. Smith
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and
|
|
Chief Executive Officer of Mitel
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul A.N. Butcher
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
President and Chief Operating
|
|
President and Chief Operating
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
Officer and Director
|
|
Officer of Mitel
|
|
|
|
Peter D. Charbonneau
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Lead Director
|
|
General Partner of Skypoint
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Corporation
|
|
|
|
Kirk K. Mandy
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Chief Executive Officer of
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zarlink
|
|
|
|
Gilbert S. Palter
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Chief Investment Officer and
|
|
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managing Partner of EdgeStone
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Partners, L.P.
|
|
|
|
Guthrie J. Stewart
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Partner of EdgeStone Capital
|
|
Montréal, Quebec, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners, L.P.
|
|
|
|
Steven E. Spooner
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
Chief Financial Officer of Mitel
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Bevington
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Vice President and Managing
|
|
Vice President and Managing
|
|
Chepstow, Wales
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director, Europe, Middle East
|
|
Director, Europe, Middle East
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Africa Region
|
|
and Africa Region of Mitel
|
|
|
|
Roger K. Fung
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Vice President and Managing
|
|
Vice President and Managing
|
|
Hong Kong, China
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director, Asia-Pacific Region
|
|
Director, Asia-Pacific Region of Mitel
|
|
|
|
Douglas W.
Michaelides
(2)
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Vice President, Global
|
|
Vice President, Global
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
Marketing of Mitel
|
|
|
|
Ronald G. Wellard
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Vice President, Product
|
|
Vice President, Product
|
|
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development
|
|
Development of Mitel
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Dr. Matthews routinely invests in and sits as a director on
the boards of businesses that are at an early stage of
development and that, as a result, involve substantial risks.
Dr. Matthews was a director of Ironbridge Networks
Corporation, which went into receivership in January 2001 and
West End Systems Corporation, which went into receivership in
February 1999.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Mr. Charbonneau is a director of METConnex Inc., which
filed a notice of intention to file for bankruptcy protection on
September 28, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Mr. Michaelides was employed by Nortel Networks Corporation
(Nortel) in the area of sales and marketing prior to
October 2003. In that time, he became subject to a management
cease trade order regarding the securities of Nortel issued by
the Ontario Securities Commission, resulting from a failure by
Nortel to file its financial statements as required. The cease
trade order was revoked on June 21, 2005.
|
|
|
We intend to appoint additional directors following completion
of the offering to meet the independence requirements of the
Nasdaq Global Market, rules and regulations of the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the SEC) and guidelines of
the Canadian provincial securities regulatory authorities.
Executive officers are appointed by the board of directors to
serve, subject to the discretion of the board of directors,
until their successors are appointed.
83
Dr. Terence H. Matthews
is our founder, Chairman,
and currently our majority shareholder. Dr. Matthews has
been involved with us and previously with Mitel Corporation (now
Zarlink), for over 18 years. In 1972, he co-founded Mitel
Corporation and served as its President until 1985 when British
Telecommunications plc bought a controlling interest in the
company. In 2001, companies controlled by Dr. Matthews
purchased Mitel Corporations communications systems
division and the Mitel trademarks to
form Mitel. Between 1986 and 2000, Dr. Matthews
founded Newbridge Networks Corporation and served as its Chief
Executive Officer and Chairman. Dr. Matthews is also the
founder of Celtic House Venture Partners, an early stage
technology venture capital firm with offices in Canada and the
United Kingdom, which invests in high technology companies.
Dr. Matthews is also the founder and Chairman of Wesley
Clover Corporation, a world class investment group with offices
in the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia with investments in
telecommunications, real estate and leisure. In addition,
Dr. Matthews currently serves on the board of directors of
a number of high technology companies, including BreconRidge and
is Chairman of March Networks Corporation, Newport Networks
Corporation and Bridgewater Systems Corporation.
Dr. Matthews holds an honors degree in electronics from the
University of Wales, Swansea and is a Fellow of the Institute of
Electrical Engineers and of the Royal Academy of Engineering. He
has been awarded honorary doctorates by several universities,
including the University of Wales, Glamorgan and Swansea, and
Carleton University in Ottawa. In 1994, he was appointed an
Officer of the Order of the British Empire, and in the
Queens Birthday Honours 2001, he was awarded a Knighthood.
Donald W. Smith
joined us in April 2001 as Chief
Executive Officer and a member of our board of directors.
Mr. Smith has more than 30 years of experience in the
communications technology industry, including over
six years at Mitel Corporation (now Zarlink) which he
joined in 1979 as a Product Manager and left in 1986, after over
four years at the Executive Vice President level. In 1996,
Mr. Smith founded and was President and Chief Executive
Officer of Cambrian Systems Corporation, a company focusing on
metro optical systems. In December 1998, Cambrian Systems was
acquired by Nortel Networks Corporation and from then until
January 2000, Mr. Smith was Vice President and General
Manager of OPTera Solutions, a division of Nortel Networks. In
January 2000, Mr. Smith was promoted to President of
Optical Internet, Nortel Networks. Mr. Smith holds a
Bachelor of Science degree in Engineering from Imperial College,
London University (U.K.).
Paul A.N. Butcher
has worked with us and previously with
Mitel Corporation for over 15 years. Since
February 16, 2001, Mr. Butcher has been our President
and Chief Operating Officer and a member of our board of
directors. From 1998 until February 2001, he was Senior Vice
President and General Manager of Mitel Communication Systems, a
division of Mitel Corporation (now Zarlink), and from 1997 until
1998, Mr. Butcher was Managing Director for the Europe,
Middle East and Africa region of Mitel Corporation where he
focused on developing and delivering converged voice and data
communications systems and applications for enterprises.
Mr. Butcher has considerable international experience,
including several European-based assignments as Marketing
Director and General Manager of Mitel Communication Systems. He
currently serves on the board of directors of Natural
Convergence Inc. Mr. Butcher holds a Hi Tech Diploma
from Reading College of Art and Technology (U.K.).
Peter D. Charbonneau
is a General Partner at Skypoint
Capital Corporation, an early-stage technology venture capital
firm, a position he has held since January 2001. From June 2000
to December 2000, Mr. Charbonneau was an Executive Vice
President of March Networks Corporation. Previously, he spent
13 years at Newbridge Networks Corporation acting in
numerous capacities including as Chief Financial Officer,
Executive Vice President, President and Chief Operating Officer
and Vice Chairman. He also served as a member of
Newbridges board of directors between 1996 and 2000.
Mr. Charbonneau was appointed to our board of directors on
February 16, 2001 and currently serves on the board of
directors of a number of other technology companies, including
BreconRidge, March Networks Corporation, True Context
Corporation, METConnex Inc. and Galazar Networks Inc.
Mr. Charbonneau holds a Bachelor of Science degree from the
University of Ottawa and an MBA from University of Western
Ontario (London, Ontario, Canada). He has been a member of the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario since 1979
84
and in June 2003 was elected by the Council as a Fellow of the
Institute in recognition of outstanding career achievements and
leadership contributions to the community and to the profession.
Kirk K. Mandy
is President and Chief Executive Officer of
Zarlink, a position he has held since February 17, 2005.
Mr. Mandy has been associated with Zarlink, formerly known
as Mitel Corporation, for 21 years. During this time, he
oversaw Mitel Corporations strategic decision to focus on
semiconductors, and the subsequent divestiture of the
communications systems division to Mitel in 2001. Between May
2001 and February 2005, he was an independent management
consultant and Vice Chairman of Zarlinks board of
directors. From July 1998 to February 2001 he was the President
and Chief Executive Officer of Mitel Corporation. From 1992 to
1998, Mr. Mandy was Vice President and General Manager of
Mitel Corporations semiconductor division. He was
appointed to our board of directors in July 2002 and currently
serves on the board of directors of Zarlink, Epocal Corporation,
Photowatt Technologies and is the Chairman of The Armstrong
Monitoring Corporation. Mr. Mandy has also served on the
board of directors of Strategic Microelectronics Corporation,
the Canadian Advanced Technology Association, Canadian
Microelectronics Corp., the Ottawa Center for Research and
Innovation and Micronet Technology. Mr. Mandys more
than 25 years of experience in the telecommunications
industry includes past Chairman of the Telecommunications
Research Center of Ontario, Past Co-Chairman of the National
Research Councils Innovation Forum and past Co-Chairman of
the Ottawa Partnership. Mr. Mandy is a graduate of
Algonquin College (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada).
Gilbert S. Palter
is the Chief Investment Officer and
Managing Partner of EdgeStone Capital Partners, L.P., a Canadian
private equity firm. Mr. Palter has held this position
since 1999, prior to which he was the founder, Chief Executive
Officer and Managing Director of Eladdan Capital Partners, Inc.,
a private equity fund targeting middle-market Canadian and U.S.
companies. Mr. Palter held the position of Vice-President
at Smith Barney Canada Inc. in 1995 and was Associate Managing
Director of Clairvest Group Inc., a TSX-listed private equity
fund, from 1993 to 1994. He was appointed to our board of
directors on April 23, 2004 and is also a member of the
board of directors of a number of companies, including
BreconRidge and Eurospec Manufacturing Inc. and is Chairman of
Specialty Catalog Corp. He is a former Chairman of Hair Club
Group Inc., Trimaster Manufacturing Inc., BFI Canada Inc. and
Farley Windows Inc. and was previously a director of Xantrex
Technology Inc. Mr. Palter holds Bachelor of Computer
Science and Economics degrees from the University of Toronto
(Ontario, Canada) and an MBA from Harvard Business School.
Guthrie J. Stewart
has been a partner of EdgeStone
Capital Partners, L.P., a Canadian private equity firm, since
October 2001. He has more than 15 years of experience in
executive management and corporate development. From 1992 to
2000, Mr. Stewart held various executive positions within
the Teleglobe Inc. group, including President and Chief
Executive Officer of Teleglobe Canada Inc., Canadas
international telecommunication carrier. Prior to that, he was a
founding officer of B.C.E. Mobile Communications Inc.
Mr. Stewart was appointed to our board of directors on
April 23, 2004 and is also a member of the board of
directors of MRRM Inc., Eurospec Manufacturing Inc., New Food
Classics, the GBC North American Growth Fund Inc. and
Chairman of BreconRidge. Mr. Stewart studied honours
science at Queens University (Kingston, Ontario, Canada),
and holds an LL.B. from Osgoode Hall Law School (Toronto,
Ontario, Canada) and an MBA from INSEAD (Fontainebleau, France).
Steven E. Spooner
joined us in June 2003 as Chief
Financial Officer. Mr. Spooner has more than 23 years
of financial, administrative and operational experience with
companies in the high technology and telecommunications sectors.
Between April 2002 and June 2003, he was an independent
management consultant for various technology companies. From
February 2000 to March 2002, Mr. Spooner was President and
Chief Executive Officer of Stream Intelligent Networks Corp., a
competitive access provider and supplier of point-to-point high
speed managed bandwidth. From February 1995 to February 2000,
Mr. Spooner served as Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of CrossKeys Systems Corporation, a publicly traded
company between 1997 and 2001. Prior to that, Mr. Spooner
was Vice President Finance and Corporate Controller of SHL
Systemhouse Inc., also a publicly traded company.
Mr. Spooner held progressively senior financial management
responsibilities at Digital Equipment for Canada Ltd. from 1984
85
to 1990 and at Wang Canada Ltd. from 1990 to 1992. He is a
Chartered Accountant (Ontario 1982) and an honours Commerce
graduate of Carleton University (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada).
Graham Bevington
has been our Vice-President and Managing
Director of the Europe, Middle East and Africa Region since
February 2001. Between January 2000 and February 2001,
Mr. Bevington held the same position for Mitel Corporation.
From 1997 until December 1999, he was Managing Director at
DeTeWe Limited. From 1986 until 1997, Mr. Bevington was
Sales Director at Shipton DeTeWe Limited.
Roger K. Fung
joined us in 2002 as Vice-President and
Managing Director, Asia-Pacific Region. From 2000 until 2002,
Mr. Fung was employed by March Networks Corporation in a
similar capacity. Prior to this he was a founding member of
Newbridge Networks Asia Ltd., where he served as President
Asia-Pacific, helping to build the business in Asia-Pacific from
1987 to 2000. He currently serves on the board of directors of
several companies, including Mart Asia Ltd. March Networks Asia
Pacific Limited, BreconRidge Manufacturing Solutions Asia Ltd.
and Vodatel Networks Holding Ltd. Mr. Fung has a Bachelor
of Applied Science in Industrial Engineering Degree from the
University of Toronto.
Douglas W. Michaelides
joined us in January 2006 as
Vice-President, Marketing. From October 2003 to December 2005,
Mr. Michaelides was Senior Vice President, Marketing at MTS
Allstream Inc., one of Canadas largest business
telecommunications service providers. Before that he held
various positions over a period of 20 years in sales and
marketing at Nortel Networks Corporation, culminating in the
role of Vice President and General Manager of the global
professional services business in 2001. Mr. Michaelides has
a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering from the
University of Toronto and an MBA from York University (Toronto,
Ontario, Canada).
Ronald G. Wellard
joined us in December 2003 as
Vice-President, Research and Development and currently holds the
position of Vice-President of Product Development. Prior to July
2003, Mr. Wellard was a Vice-President at Nortel Networks
Corporation and notably held the position of Product Development
Director for Meridian Norstar from 1994 to 1999.
Mr. Wellard has a Bachelor of Applied Science, Systems
Design Engineering degree from the University of Waterloo
(Ontario, Canada).
Board of Directors
Our board of directors currently consists of seven members. Our
articles of incorporation provide that the board of directors is
to consist of a minimum of three and a maximum of
fifteen directors and authorize the board of directors to
determine the number of directors within that range. Our
articles of incorporation also permit the directors to appoint
additional directors not to exceed one third of the number of
directors elected at the previous annual meeting of shareholders
in accordance with the
Canada Business Corporations Act
(CBCA). Shareholders have authorized a fixed
number of seven directors. The term of office for each of
the directors will expire at the time of our next annual
shareholders meeting. Under the CBCA, one quarter of our
directors must be resident Canadians as defined in the CBCA.
There are no family relationships among any of our directors or
executive officers.
Committees of the Board
The standing committees of our board of directors consist of an
audit committee and a compensation committee. We intend to
create a nominating and corporate governance committee effective
upon the completion of this offering. We intend to appoint
additional directors in order to satisfy the independence
requirements of the Nasdaq Global Market, rules and regulations
of the SEC and guidelines of the Canadian provincial securities
regulatory authorities.
Audit Committee.
Upon completion of the offering, our
audit committee will be comprised of
Messrs. , and .
Our board of directors has determined that each of these
directors currently meets the independence requirements of the
Nasdaq Global Market, the Canadian provincial securities
regulatory authorities and the rules and regulations of the SEC.
86
The principal duties and responsibilities of our audit committee
are to assist our board of directors in discharging its
oversight of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the integrity of our financial statements and accounting and
financial process and the audits of our financial statements;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our external auditors qualifications and independence;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the work and performance of our financial management, internal
auditor and external auditor; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
our system of disclosure controls and procedures and system of
internal controls regarding finance, accounting, legal
compliance, risk management and ethics established by management
and our board.
|
Our audit committee has access to all books, records, facilities
and personnel and may request any information about our company
as it may deem appropriate. It also has the authority to retain
and compensate special legal, accounting, financial and other
consultants or advisors to advise the committee.
Our audit committee also reviews and approves related party
transactions and prepares reports for the board of directors on
such related party transactions.
Compensation Committee.
Our compensation committee is
comprised of
Messrs. , and .
The principal duties and responsibilities of the compensation
committee are to assist our board of directors in discharging
its oversight of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
compensation, development, succession and retention of the chief
executive officer and key employees;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the establishment of fair and competitive compensation and
performance incentive plans; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the production of an annual report on executive compensation for
inclusion in our public disclosure documents.
|
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.
We expect
that our nominating and corporate governance committee will be
comprised of
Messrs. , and .
The principal duties and responsibilities of the nominating and
corporate governance committee will be to assist our board of
directors as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to identify candidates for membership on our board of directors
and to recommend for election to our board of directors
qualified director candidates;
|
|
|
|
|
|
to develop and recommend to our board of directors, and
implement and assess, effective corporate governance principles;
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
to oversee and assess the functioning of our board and
committees of the board of directors.
|
Director Compensation
Our directors who are not also employees are reimbursed for
out-of-pocket
expenses
incurred in connection with attending board and committee
meetings. Directors are also eligible to participate in our
equity compensation plan.
Non-employee
directors
are compensated with either cash or stock options in lieu of
cash. The number of options granted is calculated using the cash
value divided by the
Black-Scholes
value at
the time of grant.
87
The remuneration for
non-employee
directors
is based on the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual service on the board of directors (other than the Chair)
|
|
C$
|
25,000
|
|
|
Annual service as the Chair of the board of directors
|
|
C$
|
100,000
|
|
|
Annual service as a member of the audit committee (other than
the Chair)
|
|
C$
|
10,000
|
|
|
Annual service as the Chair of the audit committee
|
|
C$
|
15,000
|
|
|
Annual service as a member of other standing committees
|
|
C$
|
7,500
|
|
|
Meeting fees (varies depending on whether in person, by
telephone and by committee)
|
|
C$
|
500-2,000
|
|
In addition, each of our
non-employee
directors
is granted options to purchase common shares annually at an
exercise price equal to the fair market value of those shares on
the date of grant.
Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation
None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board
of directors or compensation committee of any entity that has
one or more executive officers serving as a member of our board
of directors or compensation committee.
Executive Compensation
The following table sets forth a summary of compensation paid
during the fiscal year ended April 30, 2006 to our Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and our three next
most highly compensated executive officers (the Named
Executive Officers). Kevin E. Bowyer, one of our
Named Executive Officers, was terminated on May 2, 2006 and is
no longer an executive officer.
Summary Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long Term Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation
|
|
|
Securities Underlying Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Deferred Share Units
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
Name And Principal Position
|
|
Salary
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald W. Smith Chief Executive
Officer
(1)
|
|
$
|
630,927
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,080
|
(4)
|
|
Paul A.N. Butcher President and Chief Operating
Officer
(1)
|
|
$
|
420,924
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,700 Common Shares
|
|
|
$
|
31,080
|
(5)
|
|
Steven E. Spooner Chief Financial
Officer
(1)
|
|
$
|
231,001
|
|
|
$
|
84,000
|
|
|
|
575,000 Common Shares
|
|
|
$
|
10,080
|
(6)
|
|
Graham Bevington Vice President and Managing
Director, Europe, Middle East and Africa
Region
(2)
|
|
$
|
260,031
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000 Common Shares
(8
|
)
|
|
$
|
37,538
|
(7)
|
|
Kevin E. Bowyer President,
Mitel Networks,
Inc.
(3)
|
|
$
|
175,000
|
|
|
|
223,375
|
|
|
|
150,000 Common Shares
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
8,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Compensation paid in Canadian dollars, but converted to
U.S. dollars at the average of the noon buying rates per
Federal Reserve Bank of New York for fiscal 2006 of
C$1.00 = $0.84.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Compensation paid in British Pounds Sterling, but converted to
U.S. dollars at the average of the noon buying rates per
Federal Reserve Bank of New York for fiscal 2006 of
GBP £1.00 = $1.78.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Mr. Bowyers other compensation for fiscal 2006 was a car
allowance of $8,000.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Mr. Smiths other compensation is a car allowance of
$10,080.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
Mr. Butchers other compensation is comprised of a car
allowance of $15,120 and a company contribution to our Deferred
Share Unit Plan of $15,960.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
Mr. Spooners other compensation is a car allowance of
$10,080.
|
|
|
|
(7)
|
Mr. Bevingtons other compensation is a car allowance
of $22,964 and a company contribution to a defined benefit plan
of $14,575.
|
|
|
|
(8)
|
These options were conditional on certain financial targets
which were not met and in accordance with the terms of their
grant, these options were cancelled on June 8, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9)
|
On May 2, 2006, Mr. Bowyer was terminated and all of
these options were cancelled.
|
|
|
88
Option Grants In the Last Fiscal Year
The following table sets forth information regarding options for
the purchase of common shares granted during the fiscal year
ended April 30, 2006 to our directors and Named Executive
Officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Market Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Total Options
|
|
|
Per Common
|
|
|
Common Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Granted to
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Employees in
|
|
|
($/Common
|
|
|
Options on
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Granted
(1)
|
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
|
|
Share)
(2)
|
|
|
Date of Grant
(3)
|
|
|
Expiration Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald W. Smith
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paul A.N. Butcher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven E. Spooner
|
|
|
575,000
|
|
|
|
11.58
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Graham Bevington
|
|
|
150,000
|
(5)
|
|
|
3.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Kevin E. Bowyer
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
3.02
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Dr. Terence H. Matthews
|
|
|
78,947
|
|
|
|
1.59
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Peter D. Charbonneau
|
|
|
102,447
|
|
|
|
2.06
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Kirk K. Mandy
|
|
|
77,342
|
|
|
|
1.56
|
%
|
|
$
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 27, 2010
|
|
|
Gilbert S. Palter
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guthrie J. Stewart
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
The options vest as to 25% on the first anniversary of the date
of grant and as to an additional 25% each year thereafter.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Option exercise prices have been set in Canadian dollars but
converted to U.S. dollars at the noon buying rate per Federal
Reserve Bank of New York on April 30, 2006 of
C$1.00 = $0.89.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Values based on the midpoint of the public offering price range
set forth on the cover page of this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
Options to purchase 78,290 common shares have been granted to
EdgeStone Capital Equity Fund II Nominee, Inc. in
connection with Mr. Palter and Mr. Stewart acting as
directors of Mitel. Mr. Palter is the Chief Investment
Officer and Managing Partner and Mr. Stewart is a Partner
of EdgeStone Capital Partners, L.P.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
These options were cancelled on June 8, 2006.
|
Options Held and Fiscal Year-End Option Values
The following table shows the number of options to purchase
common shares held by our Named Executive Officers. The value of
unexercised in-the-money options of those persons has been based
on an estimated initial public offering price of
$ per
share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Common Shares
|
|
|
Value of Unexercised
|
|
|
|
|
underlying Unexercised Options at
|
|
|
In-the-Money Options at
|
|
|
|
|
April 30, 2006
|
|
|
April 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
Unvested
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
Unvested
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald W. Smith
|
|
|
3,500,000
|
(1)
|
|
|
1,500,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Paul A.N. Butcher
|
|
|
1,375,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
1,125,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steven E. Spooner
|
|
|
106,250
|
|
|
|
893,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Bevington
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
|
|
450,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin E. Bowyer
|
|
|
37,500
|
|
|
|
262,500
|
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Includes 3,000,000 options to acquire common shares granted to
Mr. Smith from the holdings of Dr. Matthews at an
exercise price of C$3.50 ($3.11 based on the noon buying rate
per Federal Reserve Bank of New York on April 30, 2006
of C$1.00 = U.S.$0.89).
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
Includes 1,000,000 options to acquire common shares granted to
Mr. Butcher from the holdings of Dr. Matthews at an
exercise price of C$3.50 ($3.11 based on the noon buying rate
per Federal Reserve Bank of New York on April 30, 2006
of C$1.00 = U.S.$0.89).
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
On July 27, 2005 Mr. Bevington was granted
150,000 options with an exercise price of C$1.00 ($0.89
based on the noon buying rate per Federal Reserve Bank of New
York on April 30, 2006 of C$1.00 = $0.89). On
June 8, 2006, these 150,000 options were cancelled.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
On May 2, 2006, Mr. Bowyer was terminated and all of his
262,500 unvested options were cancelled.
|
89
Stock Option and Other Compensation Plans
2001 Stock Option
Plan:
We adopted an employee stock option plan in March 2001 (the
2001 Stock Option Plan). Further amendments to the
2001 Stock Option Plan have been approved by our board of
directors from time to time in accordance with section 24
of the 2001 Stock Option Plan. The 2001 Stock Option Plan
provides for the grant of options to acquire common shares to
our employees, directors and consultants.
The 2001 Stock Option Plan provides that the compensation
committee of our board of directors has the authority to
determine the individuals to whom options will be granted, the
number of common shares subject to option grants and other terms
and conditions of option grants. The 2001 Stock Option Plan also
provides that, unless otherwise determined by the compensation
committee, one-quarter of the common shares that an option
holder is entitled to purchase become eligible for purchase on
each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the
date of grant, and that options expire on the fifth anniversary
of the date of grant. The 2001 Stock Option Plan provides that
in no event may an option remain exercisable beyond the tenth
anniversary of the date of grant. The 2001 Stock Option Plan
contains change of control provisions which accelerate vesting
of options under certain circumstances.
As at September 30, 2006, there are 19,041,119 common
shares representing approximately 9% of the outstanding shares
reserved for issuance upon the exercise of options granted under
the 2001 Stock Option Plan of which options to acquire
19,041,119 common shares are currently issued and outstanding
under the 2001 Stock Option Plan.
Effective September 7, 2006, shares subject to outstanding
awards under the 2001 Stock Option Plan which lapse, expire or
are forfeited or terminated will no longer become available for
grants under this plan. Instead, new stock options and other
equity grants will be made under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan
(described below) which became effective on
September 7, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Equity Incentive Plan:
|
Our 2006 equity incentive plan was approved by our shareholders
on September 7, 2006 (the 2006 Equity Incentive
Plan). No new options will be granted under the 2001 Stock
Option Plan and all future equity awards will be granted under
the new 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. All existing options that
have been previously granted under the 2001 Stock Option Plan
will continue to be governed under that plan until exercised,
termination or expiry.
This 2006 Equity Incentive Plan provides us with increased
flexibility and choice in the types of equity compensation
awards that we may grant, including options, deferred share
units, restricted stock units, performance share units and other
share-based awards. The principal purpose of the 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan is to assist us in attracting, retaining and
motivating key employees, directors, officers and consultants
through performance related incentives.