|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated March 25 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 26 week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Aruba Networks (ARUN) |
$677 |
6.6 |
-29 |
8.5 |
8.5 |
11% |
|
secure data wireless networking: C+, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 75mm |
|||||
|
Capital Prod L.P (CPLP) |
$420 |
28.0 |
91 |
1.9 |
1.9 |
56% |
|
shipping vessel partnership: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 21mm |
|||||
|
eTelecare Global (ETEL) |
$374 |
1.6 |
17 |
4.0 |
4.8 |
20% |
|
voice-based business outsourcing: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs:28mm ADS equiv |
|||||
|
Flagstone Reinsure FSR |
$1,141 |
3.0 |
6 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
15% |
|
property and casualty reinsurance: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 85mm |
|||||
|
GSI Technology (GSIT) |
$199 |
3.4 |
25 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
29% |
|
SRAM integrated circuits: C+, 6 |
March 31 fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 28mm |
||||
|
SenoRx (SENO) |
$180 |
7.0 |
-12 |
2.6 |
3.4 |
37% |
|
medical devices: C, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 15mm |
|||||
|
Super Micro (SMCI) |
$300 |
0.7 |
15 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
28% |
|
high performance servers: B-, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 29mm |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 26 week analysis |
||||||
|
Aruba Networks |
ARUN, C+, 8 |
|||||
|
secure data wireless networking |
July 31 fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 75mm |
||||
|
Sunnyvale, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Jan 06* |
Jan 07* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$1 |
$12 |
$73 |
$28 |
$51 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross Profit % |
-136% |
25% |
59% |
55% |
61% |
$677 |
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($22.5) |
($32.6) |
($12.0) |
($9.0) |
($11.8) |
@$9 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
-2045% |
-272% |
-17% |
-32% |
-23% |
|
|
6 months ended Jan 31 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Aruba Networks (ARUN) |
$677 |
6.6 |
-29 |
8.5 |
8.5 |
11% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Enterprise mobility solution that enables secure access to data, voice and video applications |
||||||
|
across wireless and wireline enterprise networks. |
||||||
|
. The Aruba Mobile Edge Architecture allows end-users to roam to different locations within an |
||||||
|
enterprise campus or office building while maintaining secure and consistent access to all of their |
||||||
|
network resources. |
||||||
|
. ARUN's architecture also enables IT managers to establish and enforce policies that control |
||||||
|
network access and prioritize application delivery based on an end-user's organizational role and |
||||||
|
authorization level. |
||||||
|
. ARUN enables enterprise customers to extend the same user-centric solution to remote locations |
||||||
|
such as branch offices and home offices connected over the Internet. |
||||||
|
ARUN's solution |
||||||
|
ARUN's solution integrates the ArubaOS operating system, optional value-added software |
||||||
|
modules, a centralized mobility management system, high-performance programmable mobility |
||||||
|
controllers, and wired and wireless access points. |
||||||
|
Relationship with Microsoft |
||||||
|
. ARUN's strategic relationship with Microsoft began in June 2005, when Microsoft chose |
||||||
|
ARUN's products for a worldwide deployment, pursuant to which Microsoft has installed ARUN |
||||||
|
products in various sites in the United States, Asia and Europe. |
||||||
|
. As part of the relationship, ARUN supports Microsoft's Network Access Protection (NAP) |
||||||
|
architecture for enterprise security and provide interoperability with Microsoft products such as |
||||||
|
the Internet Authentication Server (IAS) and Network Policy Server (NPS). |
||||||
|
. In addition, ARUN entered into a stock issuance agreement with Microsoft, pursuant to which, |
||||||
|
upon the closing of the initial public offering, ARUN will issue shares of common stock to |
||||||
|
Microsoft with a value of $3.5 million, based on the initial public offering price. |
||||||
|
. Upon completion of this offering, and assuming all other revenue recognition criteria have been |
||||||
|
met, ARUN will recognize revenues on sales to Microsoft in excess of $3.5 million. |
||||||
|
(looks like ARUN is paying Microsoft to be a customer) |
||||||
|
Six months comparison, Jan 31 2007 versus Jan 31 2006 |
||||||
|
. Total revenues increased 85% over the six months ended January 31, 2007 due to a $33.1 million |
||||||
|
increase in product and related professional services and support sales to new and existing |
||||||
|
customers, partially offset by a $9.6 million decrease in ratable product and related professional |
||||||
|
services and support revenues. |
||||||
|
. In the three months ended January 31, 2007, total revenues increased 9% over the three months |
||||||
|
ended October 31, 2006 due to a $4.1 million increase in product and related professional services |
||||||
|
and support sales to new and existing customers, partially offset by a $1.9 million decrease in |
||||||
|
ratable product and related professional services and support revenues. |
||||||
|
. ARUN expects ratable product and related professional services and support revenues to continue |
||||||
|
to decrease in absolute dollars and as a percentage of total revenues in future periods., see note |
||||||
|
below |
||||||
|
Note: |
||||||
|
. In Q2 of fiscal 2006 (May, 2005 quarter) revenue began to be recognized when program |
||||||
|
segments were delivered and accepted, instead of over the life of the support contract. |
||||||
|
. Before, the policy was that revenue was initially deferred and then released to the income |
||||||
|
statement over the life of the support contract |
||||||
|
. At January 31, 2007, had $7.8 million in deferred revenue associated with ratable product and |
||||||
|
professional services and support revenues, of which $2.1 million will be amortized to revenue |
||||||
|
over the remainder of fiscal 2007 and $3.5 million, $1.4 million and $800,000 will be amortized to |
||||||
|
revenue in fiscal 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. |
||||||
|
Product differentiation |
||||||
|
. ARUN believes that the Aruba Mobile Edge Architecture is fundamentally different from "fixed |
||||||
|
edge" mobility solutions such as Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs), open access to fixed |
||||||
|
ports and Virtual Private Networks (VPNs). |
||||||
|
. ARUN's user-centric architecture enables a new "mobile edge" that allows users to enjoy secure, |
||||||
|
high performance access to network applications as they roam across the enterprise network and to |
||||||
|
remote locations that have an Internet connection. |
||||||
|
. Using ARUN's architecture, IT departments can manage user-based network access and enforce |
||||||
|
application delivery policies from a single integrated point-of-control in a consistent manner. |
||||||
|
StockValution by an outside third party for stock option purposes |
||||||
|
'4/30/2006: $2.19 |
||||||
|
'6/30/2006 $2.33 |
||||||
|
'10/2/2006: $3.63 |
||||||
|
'11/7/2006: $4.94 |
||||||
|
'11/21/2006: $5.12 |
||||||
|
'12/13/2006: $5.74 |
||||||
|
'1/25/2007: $7.21 |
||||||
|
History |
||||||
|
. Founded in 2002 with the intention to develop a new approach to enabling secure enterprise |
||||||
|
mobility. |
||||||
|
. ARUN believes that end-users and IT departments were demanding mobility solutions, but |
||||||
|
traditional approaches were limited by security, application performance and scalability |
||||||
|
challenges. |
||||||
|
. Began commercial shipments in June 2003. Since that time, ARUN's products have been sold to |
||||||
|
more than 2,000 end customers worldwide, including some of the largest and most complex global |
||||||
|
organizations such as Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Google, Guangzhou Metro, NTT Data |
||||||
|
Corporation, The Ohio State University, Pu Dong International Airport (Shanghai), SAP, Saudi |
||||||
|
Aramco, United States Air Force and University of Washington. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Primary competitors include Cisco Systems, primarily through its Wireless Networking Business |
||||||
|
Unit, and Symbol Technologies (which was recently acquired by Motorola for $3.9 billion). |
||||||
|
. Also faces competition from a number of smaller private companies and new market entrants. |
||||||
|
Use of $64.6mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. Based on ARUN's current cash and cash equivalents balances, ARUN does not expect that it will |
||||||
|
have to utilize the net proceeds of this offering to fund operations during the 12 months following |
||||||
|
this offering. |
||||||
|
. Currently plans to use the net proceeds for working capital and general corporate purposes, |
||||||
|
including further expansion of sales and support functions for both direct and indirect sales |
||||||
|
channels. |
||||||
|
. Specifically, plans to hire additional personnel and anticipate incurring additional facilities costs |
||||||
|
associated with such increased sales headcount. |
||||||
|
. Also expects to increase investments in research and development by hiring additional engineers. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Capital Product Partners |
CPLP, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
shipping vessel partnership |
Post-IPO shrs: 21mm |
|||||
|
Piraeus, Athens, Greece |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$15 |
Cap (mm) |
||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$4.6 |
$420 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
31% |
@$20 |
||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales* |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Capital Prod L.P (CPLP) |
$420 |
28.0 |
91 |
1.9 |
1.9 |
56% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Compare & contrast with withdrawn IPO of the parent Capital Maritime in the summer of 2005 |
||||||
|
Capital MaritimeCPM |
$945 |
3.1 |
4.7 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
27% |
|
Capital Prod L.P (CPLP) |
$420 |
28.0 |
91 |
1.9 |
1.9 |
56% |
|
Initial anticipated distribution rate |
||||||
|
. $0.3750 per unit, or $1.50 per year. |
||||||
|
. 7.5% on an annual basis |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. An international owner of product tankers, newly formed by Capital Maritime, an international |
||||||
|
shipping company with a long history of operating and investing in the shipping market. |
||||||
|
. Charters vessels under medium to long-term time and bareboat charters (two to ten years, with an |
||||||
|
average remaining term of approximately 6.3 years) to large charterers. |
||||||
|
Note: the parent Capital Maritime pulled it's proposed IPO at the last minute in the summary of 2005, see below |
||||||
|
Limited operating history |
||||||
|
As of December 31, 2006, only five of the vessels in the initial fleet had been delivered to the |
||||||
|
relevant vessel-owning subsidiaries |
||||||
|
Following the offering |
||||||
|
. Initial fleet will consist of eight newly built, Ice Class 1A, double-hull, medium-range (MR) |
||||||
|
product tankers, each of which is capable of carrying crude oil, refined oil products, such as |
||||||
|
gasoline, diesel, fuel oil and jet fuel, as well as edible oils and chemicals, such as ethanol. |
||||||
|
. CPLP plans plan to leverage the expertise and reputation of Capital Maritime to pursue growth |
||||||
|
opportunities in this market. |
||||||
|
. Upon the closing of this offering, Capital Maritime will own a 44.0% interest in CPLP |
||||||
|
New vessels |
||||||
|
. Have an agreement to purchase seven additional vessels from Capital Maritime comprised of |
||||||
|
four Ice Class 1A sister vessels that are scheduled for delivery in 2007 and three MR product |
||||||
|
tanker sister vessels that are scheduled for delivery in 2008, all of which will be under time or |
||||||
|
bareboat charters that commence at the time of delivery. |
||||||
|
. CPLP expects that by the end of the third quarter of 2008, the contracted fleet will consist of 15 |
||||||
|
MR double-hull product tankers with an average age of approximately 1.3 years |
||||||
|
Use of Proceeds |
||||||
|
100% to Capital Maritime |
||||||
|
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
||||||
|
Capital Maritime |
CPM -- offering pulled in the summary of 2005 |
|||||
|
product tankers, oil-bulk-ore carriers and bulk carrier vessels |
Post-IPO shrs:63mm |
|||||
|
Athens, Greece |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
Mrch3mos |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Revenue ($mm) |
$18 |
$78 |
$189 |
$76 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Voyage Ops Exp % |
53% |
44% |
32% |
32% |
$945 |
|
|
Net Income* |
$1.7 |
$26.1 |
146.00 |
50.80 |
@$15 |
|
|
Net Income % |
10% |
34% |
77% |
67% |
||
|
EBIDTDA % |
33% |
50% |
89% |
80% |
||
|
*no taxes according to the filing |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Capital MaritimeCPM |
$945 |
3.1 |
4.7 |
2.5 |
2.5 |
27% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. International shipping company that owns, operates and actively manages a diverse fleet of |
||||||
|
product tankers, oil-bulk-ore carriers, or OBOs, and bulk carrier vessels in the highly fragmented |
||||||
|
international shipping market. |
||||||
|
. As of June 3, 2005, existing fleet was comprised of 26 product tankers, including four OBOs, |
||||||
|
and nine bulk carriers, ranging in size from 12,000 dwt to 103,203 dwt. The aggregate carrying |
||||||
|
capacity of the fleet as of that date was approximately 1.7 million dwt. |
||||||
|
Dividend Policy |
||||||
|
Currently targeting an annual dividend of $1.05 per share, payable quarterly |
||||||
|
. $66mm per year, 7% annual rate at price range midpoint of $15 |
||||||
|
Risk |
||||||
|
. Charter hire rates in the spot market are at or near historically high levels |
||||||
|
. The shipping industry is cyclical with attendant volatility in charter hire rates and profitability |
||||||
|
. The degree of charter hire rate volatility among different types of product tanker, OBO and bulk |
||||||
|
carrier vessels has varied widely, and charter hire rates for COM's vessels are currently at or near |
||||||
|
historically high levels. |
||||||
|
. Currently, most of CPM's vessels are employed in the spot market on time and voyage charters |
||||||
|
that were fixed for agreed periods of 12 months or less |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Arranges voyage and time charters in the spot market through the use of shipbrokers. |
||||||
|
. The international tanker industry is highly fragmented and is divided among major oil companies |
||||||
|
and independent tanker owners. |
||||||
|
. Ownership of dry bulk carriers is highly fragmented and is divided among many independent dry |
||||||
|
bulk carrier owners. |
||||||
|
Use of $230mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o $60.0 million of short-term debt used to facilitate the purchase of vessels delivered in the period |
||||||
|
January 1, 2005 to date; and |
||||||
|
o $157.3 million of long-term debt to partially finance the acquisition cost of 24 vessels |
||||||
|
o Balance for general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
eTelecare Global Solns |
ETEL, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
voice-based business outsourcing |
Post-IPO shrs:28mm ADS equiv |
|||||
|
Quezon City, Philippines |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Rev ($mm) |
$32 |
$98 |
$152 |
$195 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Cost of Servicet % |
63% |
73% |
75% |
70% |
$374 |
|
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($4.5) |
$4.4 |
$2.4 |
$12.2 |
@$13.5 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
-14% |
4% |
2% |
6% |
||
|
L:ast four quarters |
||||||
|
March |
June |
Sept |
Dec |
|||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$41 |
$42 |
$52 |
$59 |
||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$1.7 |
$1.5 |
$4.4 |
$5.6 |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
4% |
4% |
8% |
9% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales* |
Earnings* |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
eTelecare Global (ETEL) |
$374 |
1.6 |
17 |
4.0 |
4.8 |
20% |
|
*annualizing Dec results |
||||||
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Compare & contrast |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
28-Mar |
|
|
eTelecare Global (ETEL) |
$429 |
1.8 |
19 |
5.5 |
5.5 |
$15.50 |
|
ExLS (EXLS) (a) |
$591 |
3.8 |
25 |
5.7 |
6.1 |
$20.91 |
|
PeopleSupport Inc. (PSPT) (b) |
$280 |
2.3 |
18 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
$11.89 |
|
WNS Holdings (WNS) (c) |
$1,160 |
2.8 |
41 |
6.3 |
8.4 |
$28.88 |
|
IPO-July 26, 2006 at $20 |
||||||
|
(a) IPO'd October 19, 2006 @$13.50 |
||||||
|
(b) IPO'd Oct 1, 2004 @$7 |
||||||
|
(c) IPO'd July 26, 2006 @$20 |
||||||
|
American Depositary Shares (one ADS represents two shares) |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. A leading provider of business process outsourcing, or BPO, services focusing on the complex, |
||||||
|
voice-based segment of customer care services delivered from both onshore and offshore |
||||||
|
locations. |
||||||
|
. Provides a range of services including technical support, financial advisory services, warranty |
||||||
|
support, customer service, sales, customer retention and marketing surveys and research. |
||||||
|
11 delivery centers, 9.800 employees |
||||||
|
Services are delivered from four delivery centers in the Philippines and seven delivery centers in |
||||||
|
the United States, with approximately 6,800 employees in the Philippines and approximately |
||||||
|
3,000 employees in the United States as of December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
Clients |
||||||
|
Largest clients in terms of revenue for the year ended December 31, 2006 were American Express |
||||||
|
Company, AOL LLC, Cingular Wireless LLC, Dell Inc., Intuit Inc., Sprint Nextel Corporation and |
||||||
|
Vonage Holdings Corp., together representing approximately 91% of revenue. |
||||||
|
Top line revenue comparisons |
||||||
|
> 2006 |
||||||
|
. In 2006, service revenue increased $42.9 million, or 28.2%, over the prior year. |
||||||
|
. This increase was primarily driven by new service programs with two new and two existing |
||||||
|
clients and, to a lesser extent, expansion of existing service programs with four existing clients. |
||||||
|
. These increases were partially offset by the ramping down of service programs or loss of clients. |
||||||
|
. ETEL declined to reduce pricing with respect to the two largest clients that were lost and another |
||||||
|
client terminated services due to a decline in its business. |
||||||
|
> 2005 |
||||||
|
. In 2005, which included a full year of Phase 2 operations, service revenue increased $54.4 |
||||||
|
million, or 55.6%, over the prior year. |
||||||
|
. This increase was primarily due to our addition of six new programs with four existing clients, |
||||||
|
which ETEL believes was the result of demonstrating value per dollar spent by these clients for |
||||||
|
existing programs, and expansion of a client relationship that gained through our acquisition of |
||||||
|
Phase 2. |
||||||
|
. In addition, revenue in 2005 increased over 2004 due to expansion of existing programs with |
||||||
|
existing clients and the addition of 18 programs with 11 new clients. |
||||||
|
. The increase in revenue in 2005 was partially offset by revenue lost as a result of the decision to |
||||||
|
reduce a significant client program due to ETEL's inability to negotiate satisfactory pricing terms, |
||||||
|
the bankruptcy of one clients and loss of another client, whose direct response marketing program |
||||||
|
was not well suited to ETEL's delivery model due to its sporadic call arrival patterns. |
||||||
|
A Different Business Model? |
||||||
|
See competition below |
||||||
|
. Founded in 1999 by alumni of the management consulting firm McKinsey & Company, who |
||||||
|
implemented analytical tools and a focus on quantifiable value for the client in the customer care |
||||||
|
BPO market. |
||||||
|
. Business model has three key elements: a focus on delivering complex, voice-based BPO |
||||||
|
services via a multi-shore delivery platform; making significant investments in the quality of |
||||||
|
ETEL's people and processes; and entering into contracts that contain pricing terms that clients |
||||||
|
agree are based on the value created per dollar spent by the client, |
||||||
|
. Rather than a pricing model focused solely on being able to deliver the least expensive service |
||||||
|
offering, or a cost-based commodity pricing model, that ETEL believes is most often emphasized |
||||||
|
in its industry. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
o offshore-based customer care BPO companies with offshore delivery center services |
||||||
|
capabilities, such as Ambergris Solutions Inc., ePLDT, Inc., ExlService Holdings, Inc., |
||||||
|
PeopleSupport, Inc., and Wipro |
||||||
|
o U.S.-based customer care BPO companies with onshore and offshore delivery center services |
||||||
|
capabilities, such as APAC Customer Services Inc., ClientLogic Corporation, Convergys |
||||||
|
Corporation, ICT Group, Inc., Sutherland Global Services, Inc., SITEL Corporation, Sykes |
||||||
|
Enterprises, Incorporated, TeleTech Holdings, Inc. and West Corporation; |
||||||
|
o broad-based U.S. outsourcing companies such as Accenture Ltd., Affiliated Computer Services, |
||||||
|
Inc., Electronic Data Systems Corporation, and IBM Global Services; and |
||||||
|
o numerous smaller companies, including 24/7 Customer, NuComm International Inc., |
||||||
|
SlashSupport and Vision-X, Inc. |
||||||
|
Use of $66mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. Repay $30mm in debt |
||||||
|
. Balance for working capital |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Flagstone Reinsurance |
FSR, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
property and casualty reinsurance |
Post-IPO shrs: 85mm |
|||||
|
Hamilton, Bermuda |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||||
|
Gross Premiums written ($mm) |
$302 |
Cap (mm) |
||||
|
Net premiums |
$282 |
$1,141 |
||||
|
Net premiums earned |
$192 |
@$13 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$152 |
|||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
50% |
|||||
|
Loss ratio |
14% |
|||||
|
Acquisition cost ratio |
16% |
|||||
|
G&A ratio |
18% |
|||||
|
Combined ratio |
48% |
|||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Flagstone Reinsure FSR |
$1,141 |
3.0 |
6 |
1.0 |
1.1 |
15% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Dividend policy |
||||||
|
. Expects to pay a quarterly cash dividend of $0.04 per common share |
||||||
|
. 2.5% annual rate |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Bermuda-based global reinsurance company |
||||||
|
. Through subsidiaries, writes primarily property, property catastrophe and short-tail specialty and |
||||||
|
casualty reinsurance. |
||||||
|
Background |
||||||
|
. Formed by Haverford, a company controlled and capitalized by Mark Byrne, the Executive |
||||||
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors, and David Brown, Chief Executive Officer |
||||||
|
. Commenced operations in December 2005. |
||||||
|
. Since formation raised approximately $850 million through three closings of the private |
||||||
|
placement of common shares and the issuance of Deferrable Interest Debentures. |
||||||
|
. Through the year ended December 31, 2006, we wrote $302.5 million in gross premiums, of |
||||||
|
which $219.1 million was property catastrophe reinsurance. |
||||||
|
Cyclical business |
||||||
|
Current Market Environment |
||||||
|
> The property and casualty insurance and reinsurance industry historically has been a cyclical |
||||||
|
business. During periods of excess underwriting capacity, competition generally results in lower |
||||||
|
pricing and less favorable policy terms and conditions for both insurers and reinsurers. During |
||||||
|
periods of diminished underwriting capacity, industry-wide pricing and policy terms and |
||||||
|
conditions become more favorable for insurers and reinsurers. |
||||||
|
> During the 1980s and extending into the late 1990s, the worldwide insurance and reinsurance |
||||||
|
industry was characterized by highly competitive market conditions. Excess industry underwriting |
||||||
|
capacity, declining premium rates, less favorable policy terms and adverse reserve developments |
||||||
|
all contributed to poor underwriting results. |
||||||
|
> The disasters resulting from the 2005 hurricane season have helped to create much more |
||||||
|
favorable market conditions for providers of reinsurance. That season included several of the |
||||||
|
largest insured losses in history: |
||||||
|
o Hurricane Katrina, which struck Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and surrounding areas in August 2005 |
||||||
|
o Hurricane Rita, which struck Texas and Louisiana in September 2005 and |
||||||
|
o Hurricane Wilma, which struck Florida and the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico in October 2005. |
||||||
|
> Losses from Hurricane Katrina represented the largest insured catastrophe in the history of the |
||||||
|
insurance industry, surpassing the $20.7 billion in property losses from the terrorist attacks of |
||||||
|
September 11, 2001, and the $22.3 billion in losses from Hurricane Andrew in August 1992, |
||||||
|
previously the largest insured event in history. |
||||||
|
> Of the ten largest insured losses to date, three of which occurred in the latter half of 2005: |
||||||
|
Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Competes with reinsurers that provide property-based lines of reinsurance, such as ACE Tempest |
||||||
|
Reinsurance Ltd., AXIS Capital Holdings Ltd., Lloyd's of London, Montpelier Re Holdings Ltd., |
||||||
|
RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd., XL Re Ltd., and similar companies. |
||||||
|
Employees |
||||||
|
. As at March 13, 2007, we had 114 employees |
||||||
|
. $10mm valuation per employee |
||||||
|
Use of $159mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
To Flagstone to increase the underwriting capacity of its reinsurance operations, less underwriting |
||||||
|
expenses of $16.3mm |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
GSI Technology |
GSIT, C+, 6 |
|||||
|
SRAM integrated circuits |
March 31 fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 28mm |
||||
|
Santa Clara, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Dec 31, 05* |
Dec 31, 06* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$35 |
$46 |
$43 |
$32 |
$44 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross Profit % |
25% |
33% |
32% |
31% |
39% |
$199 |
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($0.7) |
$4.8 |
$4.2 |
$2.9 |
$6.0 |
@$7.25 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
-2% |
10% |
10% |
9% |
14% |
|
|
*nine months ended Dec 31 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
GSI Technology (GSIT) |
$199 |
3.4 |
25 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
29% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
6 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Develops and market "Very Fast" static random access memory, or SRAM, products that are |
||||||
|
incorporated primarily in high-performance networking and telecommunications equipment, such |
||||||
|
as routers, switches, wide area network infrastructure equipment, wireless base stations and |
||||||
|
network access equipment. |
||||||
|
. In addition, serves the ongoing needs of the military, industrial, test equipment and medical |
||||||
|
markets for high-performance SRAMs. |
||||||
|
Note: . March & June quarters expected to be impacted negatively by Cisco's transistion to a 'lean |
||||||
|
manufacturing' program, see 'customers' below |
||||||
|
Markets |
||||||
|
> Gartner Dataquest divides the SRAM market into segments based on speed. |
||||||
|
. The highest performance segment is comprised of SRAMs that operate at speeds of less than 10 |
||||||
|
nanoseconds, which GSIT refers to as "Very Fast SRAMs." |
||||||
|
. Gartner Dataquest estimates that this segment of the SRAM market will be greater than $1 billion |
||||||
|
in 2007. |
||||||
|
. Based on the performance characteristics of its products and the breadth of GSIT's product |
||||||
|
portfolio, GSIT considers itselfe to be a leading provider of Very Fast SRAMs. |
||||||
|
> High-performance networking and telecommunications equipment requires Very Fast SRAMs, |
||||||
|
and GSIT expects that the emerging variety of applications within this market will continue to |
||||||
|
drive a need for an increasing number of specialized Very Fast SRAMs. |
||||||
|
Customers |
||||||
|
> Sells products to leading networking and telecommunications OEMs, including Alcatel-Lucent, |
||||||
|
> Cisco sales expected to decline |
||||||
|
. Cisco Systems is the largest OEM customer and accounted for between 28% and 34% of our net |
||||||
|
revenues in each of the last three fiscal years and the nine months ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. GSIT expects Cisco Systems to account for a lesser percentage of net revenues for the quarter |
||||||
|
ending March 31, 2007. |
||||||
|
. Cisco Systems has announced the implementation of a "lean manufacturing" program under |
||||||
|
which it plans to reduce the levels of inventory carried by it and by its contract manufacturers. |
||||||
|
. GSIT believes that the transition to this new program will result in reductions in purchases of |
||||||
|
GSIT products by Cisco Systems' contract manufacturers during the quarter ending March 31, |
||||||
|
2007, as they draw down their existing inventories, and that such reductions will likely result in |
||||||
|
GSIT net revenues for the quarter being less than in the previous quarter. |
||||||
|
. This transition could also impact GSIT revenues in the quarter ending June 30, 2007. |
||||||
|
GSIT expects quarterly fluctuations in revenue |
||||||
|
. Historically, orders on hand at the beginning of each quarter are insufficient to meet revenue |
||||||
|
objectives for that quarter and are generally cancelable up to 30 days prior to scheduled delivery. . |
||||||
|
Accordingly, GSIT depends on obtaining and shipping orders in the same quarter to achieve |
||||||
|
revenue objectives. |
||||||
|
. In addition, the timing of product releases, purchase orders and product availability could result |
||||||
|
in significant product shipments at the end of a quarter. |
||||||
|
Pending Litigation |
||||||
|
. On October 23, 2006, GSIT was served with a civil antitrust complaint filed by Reclaim Center, |
||||||
|
Inc. and other plaintiffs in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California |
||||||
|
against the Company and a number of other semiconductor companies. |
||||||
|
. The complaint was filed on behalf of a purported class of indirect purchasers of SRAM products |
||||||
|
throughout the United States. The complaint alleges that the defendants conspired to raise the |
||||||
|
price of SRAM in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the California Cartwright Act, and |
||||||
|
several other state antitrust, unfair competition and consumer protection statutes. Shortly |
||||||
|
thereafter, a number of similar complaints were filed by other plaintiffs in various jurisdictions on |
||||||
|
behalf of purported classes of both direct and indirect purchasers. We have been served in some |
||||||
|
but not all of these subsequent actions |
||||||
|
. GSIT believes it has meritorious defenses to the allegations in the complaints, and intend to |
||||||
|
defend these lawsuits vigorously. |
||||||
|
Intellectual property |
||||||
|
Currently holds three United States patents, expiring between November 2022 and April 2023, and |
||||||
|
has ten patent applications pending. |
||||||
|
. Does not consider existing patents to be materially important to the business |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Cypress Semiconductor, Integrated Device Technology, Integrated Silicon Solution, NEC, |
||||||
|
Renesas and Samsung Electronics. While some competitors offer a broad array of memory |
||||||
|
products and offer some of their products at lower prices than we do, GSIT believes that its focus on |
||||||
|
and performance leadership in low latency, high density Very Fast SRAMs provide us with key |
||||||
|
competitive advantages. |
||||||
|
. The market for Very Fast SRAM products is competitive and is characterized by technological |
||||||
|
change, declining average selling prices and product obsolescence. |
||||||
|
. Competition could increase in the future from existing competitors and from other companies |
||||||
|
that may enter our existing or future markets with solutions that may be less costly or provide |
||||||
|
higher performance or more desirable features than our products. This increased competition may |
||||||
|
result in price reductions, reduced profit margins and loss of market share. |
||||||
|
In addition |
||||||
|
. In addition, GSIT is vulnerable to advances in technology by competitors, including new SRAM |
||||||
|
architectures as well as new forms of DRAM and other new memory technologies. |
||||||
|
. Because GSIT has limited experience developing IC products other than Very Fast SRAMs, any |
||||||
|
efforts by GSIT to introduce new products based on a new memory technology may not be |
||||||
|
successful and its business may suffer. |
||||||
|
Use of $40mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 6.1mm shares |
||||||
|
(selling stockholders intend to see 1.9mm shares) |
||||||
|
Working capital and other general corporate purposes, including capital expenditures and research |
||||||
|
and development. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SenoRx |
SENO, C, 8 |
|||||
|
medical devices |
Post-IPO shrs: 15mm |
|||||
|
Aliso Viejo, California |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Rev ($mm) |
$10 |
$14 |
$19 |
$26 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Gross Profit % |
52% |
53% |
47% |
47% |
$180 |
|
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($8.7) |
($6.8) |
($8.6) |
($15.4) |
@$12 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
-84% |
-49% |
-45% |
-60% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
SenoRx (SENO) |
$180 |
7.0 |
-12 |
2.6 |
3.4 |
37% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
Note on grading/scoring: we believe SENO has very good long term potential (scored of (8) , but because it is losing |
||||||
|
money at a current high rate, it is graded C,. |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Minimally-invasive medical devices for the diagnosis of breast cancer. |
||||||
|
. Initial product focus has been biopsy systems and breast tissue markers. |
||||||
|
. Also developing products for use in the treatment of breast cancer that SENO will seek to |
||||||
|
commercialize beginning in the second half of 2007, subject to receipt of required regulatory |
||||||
|
approvals, including a radiation balloon for localized radiation therapy and cutting devices for |
||||||
|
both excision of tissue and cosmetic reconstruction. |
||||||
|
. Since first products in 2002, SENO has established over 1,000 customer accounts. |
||||||
|
EnCor product |
||||||
|
. Flagship diagnostic product, the EnCor system, is a minimally-invasive, vacuum-assisted breast |
||||||
|
biopsy system. |
||||||
|
. EnCor allows users to obtain multiple biopsy samples with a quick, single probe insertion. In |
||||||
|
contrast to existing competitive systems, EnCor is the only "open/closed" tissue collection system, |
||||||
|
providing the operator with a clear view of tissue samples through a proprietary transparent |
||||||
|
collection chamber, and the ability to either open the chamber to examine and remove one or |
||||||
|
more samples or to continue uninterrupted collection of multiple samples. |
||||||
|
. The EnCor system incorporates novel programmability, and is designed the system to be |
||||||
|
compatible with the most commonly used imaging modalities, including x-ray, ultrasound, and |
||||||
|
magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI. |
||||||
|
. With its ease of use and functionality, SEND believes that EnCor can play an important role in |
||||||
|
the paradigm shift from invasive open surgical procedures to minimally-invasive biopsy |
||||||
|
procedures. |
||||||
|
EnCor FDA clearance & marketing |
||||||
|
. SENO received clearance for the EnCor system from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or |
||||||
|
FDA, and conducted marketing preference testing in late 2004. |
||||||
|
. Subsequently progressed with a full commercial launch in November 2005. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, we had an installed base of 317 EnCor systems and had sold more |
||||||
|
than 50,000 EnCor disposable probes. |
||||||
|
. In launching the EnCor system, first targeted customers using SEND's ultrasound-guided, |
||||||
|
vacuum-assisted biopsy system launched in 2003, the SenoCor 360, because both the EnCor and |
||||||
|
SenoCor handpieces are compatible with the same modular console. |
||||||
|
. More broadly, SENO intends to leverage its base of over 1,000 customers as potential EnCor |
||||||
|
customers. |
||||||
|
. SENO's tissue markers, first introduced in 2002, are competitively differentiated given their |
||||||
|
visibility under ultrasound, bioresorbability and compatibility not only with our biopsy devices, |
||||||
|
but also with other companies' devices. |
||||||
|
Radiation Balloon |
||||||
|
. In breast care surgery and therapeutics, SENO is developing minimally-invasive products for |
||||||
|
removal of lesions, treatment of the lesion site and cosmetic reconstruction following therapy. |
||||||
|
. SEND's Radiation Balloon, for which SENO expects to apply for FDA 510(k) clearance in the |
||||||
|
second half of 2007, is designed as a novel radiation therapy device that uses a vacuum to remove |
||||||
|
excess fluid and to adhere often irregularly shaped lumpectomy cavities closely to the balloon, as |
||||||
|
well as multiple radiation seed lumens to deliver precise radiation dosing. |
||||||
|
. SENO believes that its radiation balloon can play an important role in the paradigm shift from |
||||||
|
traditional whole breast radiation therapy to localized partial breast radiation therapy. |
||||||
|
Net Revenues |
||||||
|
. Breast biopsy systems, the EnCor and SenoCor 360, consist of two primary components: |
||||||
|
reusable handpieces and disposable probes, and are used in conjunction with the SenoRx Breast |
||||||
|
Biopsy Console. |
||||||
|
. The disposable probes form the basis of a recurring revenue stream and also contribute to the |
||||||
|
sales of tissue markers. |
||||||
|
. SENO expects that sales of biopsy disposable, biopsy capital and marker products will continue |
||||||
|
to grow in 2007. |
||||||
|
. SENO further expects that the sales of adjunct and excision products will also grow, though at a |
||||||
|
slower rate. |
||||||
|
Revenue comparison, year ended December 31, 2006 compared to 2005 |
||||||
|
. Net revenues increased $6.25 million, or 32.5%, to $25.5 million in the 2006 from $19.25 million |
||||||
|
in 2005. |
||||||
|
. The increase was primarily attributable to a $4.8 million increase in biopsy disposable revenues, |
||||||
|
comprised of a $4.7 million increase in EnCor biopsy disposable revenues and a $0.1 million |
||||||
|
increase in SenoCor biopsy disposable revenues. The remaining $1.5 million increase resulted |
||||||
|
from increased biopsy marker product revenues of $1.25 million, increased adjunct product |
||||||
|
revenues of $0.35 million, largely related to increased Gamma Finder sales and a decrease in |
||||||
|
excision and biopsy capital product revenues of $0.1 million and $50,000, respectively. |
||||||
|
. The $4.7 million increase in EnCor biopsy disposable revenues discussed above was primarily |
||||||
|
due to an increase in the installed base of EnCor systems from approximately 164 as of December |
||||||
|
31, 2005 to 317 as of December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
Intellectual property |
||||||
|
As of December 31, 2006, had |
||||||
|
. 41 issued United States patents primarily covering devices relating to breast biopsy, including |
||||||
|
biopsy site marking devices, excision devices and balloon products, the earliest of which will |
||||||
|
expire in 2018 and the last of which will expire in 2022, |
||||||
|
. Two granted European regional patents and, based on the grant of these two European regional |
||||||
|
patents, a total of 13 granted national patents from eight different European countries. |
||||||
|
. In addition, has 65 pending United States patent applications, nine pending PCT (international) |
||||||
|
patent applications, 16 pending European patent applications, 18 pending Canadian patent |
||||||
|
applications, 11 pending Japanese patent applications, and four pending Australian patent |
||||||
|
applications. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Breast biopsy and marker products compete with, among others, products sold by Johnson & |
||||||
|
Johnson, C.R. Bard and Suros Surgical Systems, the latter of which was acquired by Hologic in '06 |
||||||
|
. SENO expects the Radiation Balloon, if it receives the required regulatory approval, to compete |
||||||
|
against well-established external beam radiation devices, as well as current and potential future |
||||||
|
manufacturers of balloon brachytherapy devices. |
||||||
|
. Expects to compete directly with the current industry leader, Cytyc, as well as other companies |
||||||
|
that have minimally-invasive therapeutic devices in various stages of development. |
||||||
|
. SENO's commercial success will depend on a general market shift from whole to partial breast |
||||||
|
radiation. |
||||||
|
Use of $59mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. $1.8mm to repay interest |
||||||
|
. $36.0 million for sales and marketing initiatives to support the ongoing commercialization of the |
||||||
|
EnCor system and other products and products under development; and |
||||||
|
. $9.0 million for research and development activities, including support of product development, |
||||||
|
regulatory and clinical initiatives. |
||||||
|
. Remainder of for general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Super Micro Computer |
SMCI, B-, 7 |
|||||
|
high performance servers |
June 30, fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 29mm |
||||
|
San Jose, CA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Dec, 05* |
Dec, 06* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$167 |
$212 |
$302 |
$137 |
$204 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross Profit % |
17% |
16% |
20% |
19% |
18% |
$300 |
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$4.9 |
$7.1 |
$16.9 |
$7.0 |
$9.7 |
@$10.5 |
|
Profit (loss) % |
3% |
3% |
6% |
5% |
5% |
|
|
*6 months ended Dec 31 |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings* |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Super Micro (SMCI) |
$300 |
0.7 |
15 |
2.6 |
2.6 |
28% |
|
*annualized six months ended Dec 31, 2006 |
||||||
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Summary: |
||||||
|
Very good long term business, low gross margin, consistently profitable |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Began operations in 1993 and has been profitable every year since inception. |
||||||
|
. Designs, develops, manufactures and sells application optimized, high performance server |
||||||
|
solutions based on an innovative, modular and open-standard x86 architecture. |
||||||
|
. Application optimized servers are configured to meet specific customer needs in contrast to |
||||||
|
typical servers which are offered in limited standardized configurations. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, we offered over 3,850 SKUs (stock keeping units), including SKUs |
||||||
|
for server systems, serverboards, chassis and power supplies and other system accessories. |
||||||
|
Sales & distribution |
||||||
|
. Sells server systems and components primarily through distributors, which include value added |
||||||
|
resellers and system integrators, and to a lesser extent to OEMs |
||||||
|
. As well as through a direct sales force. |
||||||
|
. During fiscal year 2006, SMCI's products were purchased by over 400 customers, most of which |
||||||
|
are distributors in more than 70 countries. |
||||||
|
Sales comparison of Six Months Ended December 31, 2005 and 2006 |
||||||
|
. Net sales increased by $67.1 million, or 49.1%, from $136.6 million to $203.8 million, for the six |
||||||
|
months ended December 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively. |
||||||
|
. This was due primarily to an increase in unit volumes and average selling prices. For the six |
||||||
|
months ended December 31, 2006, the approximate number of units sold increased 39.5% to |
||||||
|
1,017,000 compared to 729,000 for the six months ended December 31, 2005. |
||||||
|
. Growth in unit volumes was primarily due to the introduction and growth of x7, AMD and PD |
||||||
|
series motherboards and an increase in sales of accessories such as memory and disk drives offset |
||||||
|
in part by lower sales of x5 motherboards. |
||||||
|
. The growth in average selling prices was due to the increase in server systems average selling |
||||||
|
prices primarily due to increased components being added to our server systems. |
||||||
|
. For the six months ended December 31, 2006, the approximate number of units sold in server |
||||||
|
systems increased 22.6% to 65,000 compared to 53,000 for the six months ended December 31, 05 |
||||||
|
. The average selling price of units sold in server systems increased 22.2% to approximately |
||||||
|
$1,100 in the six months ended December 31, 2006 compared to approximately $900 in the six |
||||||
|
months ended December 31, 2005 primarily due to higher sales of an AMD series of server |
||||||
|
systems offset in part by declines in average selling prices of more mature products. |
||||||
|
. Sales of server systems increased by $27.0 million or 60.1% from the six months ended |
||||||
|
December 31, 2005 to the six months ended December 31, 2006 primarily due to increase in OEM |
||||||
|
servers and shipments of 6000 Series configurations of servers. |
||||||
|
. Sales of server systems represented 32.9% of net sales for the six months ended December 31, |
||||||
|
2005 as compared to 35.3% of net sales for the six months ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
Value of common stock, by an outside valuation firm |
||||||
|
For each of the quarters in fiscal year 2006 and the first two quarters of fiscal year 2007: |
||||||
|
September 30, 2005, $4.87 |
||||||
|
December 31, 2005, $8.56 |
||||||
|
March 31, 2006, $13.70 |
||||||
|
June 30, 2006, $12.05 |
||||||
|
September 30, 2006, $12.85 |
||||||
|
December 31, 2006, $13.89 |
||||||
|
The increase in the fair value of common stock during fiscal year 2006 and the first two quarters |
||||||
|
of fiscal year 2007 was due primarily to the following factors: |
||||||
|
. Continued net sales growth of 42.9% from $211.8 million in fiscal year 2005 to $302.5 million in |
||||||
|
fiscal year 2006. Net sales grew from $136.6 million to $203.8 million from the six months ended |
||||||
|
December 31, 2005 to the six months ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. Net income growing faster than sales at 139.0% from $7.1 million in fiscal year 2005 to $16.9 |
||||||
|
million in fiscal year 2006. Net income increased from $7.0 million to $9.8 million from the six |
||||||
|
months ended December 31, 2005 to the six months ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. Increasing percentage of our sales from server systems, which generally have higher gross |
||||||
|
margins than sales of our components. |
||||||
|
. Introduction of new products based on AMD and Intel processors. |
||||||
|
. Addition of our chief financial officer in May 2006 and significant expansion of accounting and |
||||||
|
finance department to meet the demands of a public reporting company. |
||||||
|
. Decreases in marketability discount from 31.1% at June 30, 2005 to 27.2% at September 30, |
||||||
|
2005 to 23.3% at December 31, 2005 to 9.8% at March 31, 2006 to 6.5% at June 30, 2006 to 3.3% |
||||||
|
at September 30, 2006 and to 0% at December 31, 2006 reflecting increasing expectations of an |
||||||
|
eventual initial public offering |
||||||
|
. The decrease in fair value of our common stock at June 30, 2006 relative to March 31, 2006 was |
||||||
|
primarily due to changes in our long term model after review of projected revenue growth rates for |
||||||
|
the industry by the new chief financial officer. |
||||||
|
. The increase in fair value of common stock at September 30, 2006 relative to June 30, 2006 was |
||||||
|
primarily due to decreases in marketability discount and risk free rate utilized to reflect a |
||||||
|
increasing expectation of an eventual initial public offering and resolution of some of the |
||||||
|
uncertainties regarding legal matters. |
||||||
|
. The increase in fair value of common stock at December 31, 2006 relative to September 30, 2006 |
||||||
|
was primarily due to the elimination of the marketability discount to reflect our increasing |
||||||
|
expectation of an eventual initial public offering and other factors including fluctuations in the |
||||||
|
market value of a peer group of companies. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Global technology vendors such as Dell Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, International Business |
||||||
|
Machines Corporation and Intel; |
||||||
|
. Specialized server vendors, such as Rackable Systems, Inc.; and |
||||||
|
. Original Design Manufacturers, or ODMs, such as Quanta Computer, Inc. |
||||||
|
Use of $59mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 6.4mm shares |
||||||
|
(shareholders intend to sell 1.6mm shares) |
||||||
|
. Repay $19mm in debt |
||||||
|
. Balance for working capital and general corporate purposes. |
||||||
|
. Presently has no intention to acquire any businesses, products or technologies |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated March 18 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 19 week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
CastlePoint (CPHL) |
$499 |
6.3 |
48 |
1.1 |
1.4 |
17% |
|
property/casualty insurance/reinsurance: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 35.7mm |
|||||
|
Cheniere Enrgy Prt CQP |
$3,302 |
25.0 |
-381 |
1.8 |
-21.1 |
8% |
|
LP for LNG terminal in Louisiana: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 165mm |
|||||
|
Glu Mobile (GLUU) |
$312 |
5.5 |
-34 |
2.5 |
3.9 |
26% |
|
Publishes games for mobile telephones: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 28.4mm |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 19 week analysis |
||||||
|
CastlePoint |
CPHL, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
property/casualty insurance/reinsurance |
Post-IPO shrs: 35.7mm |
|||||
|
Hamilton, Bermuda |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||||
|
Net earned premiums |
$79 |
Cap (mm) |
||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$10.5 |
$499 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
13.3% |
@$14 |
||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
CastlePoint (CPHL) |
$499 |
6.3 |
48 |
1.1 |
1.4 |
17% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Dividend policy |
||||||
|
. Currently intends to authorize the payment of an annual cash dividend of $0.10 per common share |
||||||
|
to our shareholders of record, payable on a quarterly basis |
||||||
|
. Annualized 2.85% rate at $14 per share, can be expected to increase |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Bermuda holding company organized to provide property and casualty insurance and reinsurance |
||||||
|
business solutions, products and services primarily to small insurance companies and program |
||||||
|
underwriting agents in the United States. |
||||||
|
. Incorporated in November 2005 to take advantage of opportunities believed to exist in the |
||||||
|
insurance and reinsurance industry |
||||||
|
. For traditional quota share reinsurance, insurance risk-sharing and program business as well as |
||||||
|
insurance company services that can be purchased on a stand-alone, or unbundled basis, to small |
||||||
|
insurance companies and program underwriting agents. |
||||||
|
Sponsor, Tower Group Inc. (TWGP), $750mm market cap |
||||||
|
Tower Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation, is the sponsor and CPHL's largest customer for |
||||||
|
reinsurance and risk-sharing products |
||||||
|
. Tower Group, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides a range of specialized property and casualty |
||||||
|
insurance products and services to small to mid-sized businesses and individuals principally in the |
||||||
|
New York City, and operates in three segments: Insurance, Reinsurance, and Insurance Services |
||||||
|
. Tower Group was incorporated in 1989 |
||||||
|
Competitive Strengths |
||||||
|
o Access to Profitable Book of Business from Tower. |
||||||
|
. Pursuant to agreements with Tower, we reinsure and, effective January 1, 2007 (subject to |
||||||
|
regulatory approval by the New York State Insurance Department), also expect to pool, a |
||||||
|
significant amount of the brokerage business that Tower writes, which generated an average gross |
||||||
|
loss ratio of 57.7% for the three years ended December 31, 2005. |
||||||
|
. Access to Established Insurance Company Infrastructure. Through our service and expense |
||||||
|
sharing agreement with Tower's subsidiaries, we and our clients will be able to access Tower's |
||||||
|
well established insurance company infrastructure, including claims handling and administration, |
||||||
|
policy administration systems, technology, underwriting acumen, program design, regulatory |
||||||
|
compliance and other services. We believe that access to these capabilities will enable us to |
||||||
|
successfully write traditional program business, specialty program business and insurance risk |
||||||
|
sharing business, while avoiding the significant cost of establishing a primary insurance company |
||||||
|
infrastructure. |
||||||
|
o Operations in Bermuda and Access to Distribution Sources in the United States. |
||||||
|
Access to favorable business and regulatory environment through the reinsurance subsidiary in |
||||||
|
Bermuda, CastlePoint Re, provides CPHL with the ability to develop cost-effective insurance and |
||||||
|
reinsurance products. |
||||||
|
o Strong Market Relationships |
||||||
|
. Market our reinsurance products, and expect to market insurance products, principally through |
||||||
|
management's existing industry contacts and through independent reinsurance intermediaries. |
||||||
|
. Senior management team has extensive industry relationships, including relationships with a |
||||||
|
number of reinsurance intermediaries, program underwriting agents and insurance companies. |
||||||
|
. CPHL believes that these relationships will allow CPHL to quickly establish a presence in the |
||||||
|
reinsurance and insurance markets. |
||||||
|
o New Insurance Company. |
||||||
|
. As a recently formed company, we are unencumbered by historical liability exposures currently |
||||||
|
affecting competitors, including claims relating to asbestos and environmental remediation and |
||||||
|
other mass torts. |
||||||
|
. In addition, as a start-up company, does not have outdated technology systems, as many larger |
||||||
|
competitors do, that require costly updating or replacement. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. QBE Insurance Group Limited, PartnerRe Ltd., Max Re Ltd., Munich Reinsurance America Inc. |
||||||
|
and General Reinsurance Corporation, all of which offer proportional reinsurance. |
||||||
|
. In addition, faces competition from specialty insurance companies, program underwriting agents |
||||||
|
and intermediaries, as well as diversified financial services companies |
||||||
|
> Reinsurers for U.S. clients |
||||||
|
. ACE Insurance Company of North America, American International Group, Inc., CNA Financial |
||||||
|
Corporation, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc., XL |
||||||
|
America Group, Partner Reinsurance Companies, RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd., Swiss |
||||||
|
Reinsurance Company, Berkshire Hathaway Inc., Lloyd's, Munich Reinsurance America Inc., |
||||||
|
QBE Insurance Group Limited, General Reinsurance Corporation and Max Re Ltd. |
||||||
|
. In addition, there are Bermuda reinsurers with whom CPHO competes, such as Arch Capital |
||||||
|
Group Ltd., Endurance Specialty Holdings Ltd., AXIS Capital Holdings Limited, Allied World |
||||||
|
Assurance Company, Ltd. and Platinum Underwriters Holdings, Ltd. |
||||||
|
> Furthermore, following the recent hurricanes, newly formed and existing insurance industry |
||||||
|
companies have raised capital to meet perceived demand in the current environment and address |
||||||
|
underwriting limit issues, although CPHL believes many of these new entrants plan to focus on |
||||||
|
property excess of loss, offshore marine and energy and retrocessional coverage and therefore not |
||||||
|
compete directly with CPHL in most cases |
||||||
|
> Insurance |
||||||
|
W.R. Berkley Corporation, Markel Corporation, Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Corp., RLI |
||||||
|
Corp., Arch Capital Group Ltd., Meadowbrook Insurance Group, Inc. and Argonaut Group, Inc. |
||||||
|
> Unbundled Insurance Services |
||||||
|
Leading third party administrators are Gallagher Bassett Services, Inc., Crawford & Company, and |
||||||
|
GAB Robins North America, Inc |
||||||
|
Employees and Administration |
||||||
|
. Relatively small staff of employees |
||||||
|
. As of February 9, 2007, employed a total of 21 employees, 18 of whom were full-time |
||||||
|
Use of $75.5 of IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. Further capitalize CastlePoint Re |
||||||
|
. For general corporate purposes |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Cheniere Energy Partners |
CQP, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
LP for LNG terminal in Louisiana |
Post-IPO shrs: 165mm |
|||||
|
Houston, Texas |
IPO Mkt |
|||||
|
Forecast for four quarters ended June 30, 2010 |
Cap (mm) |
|||||
|
Cash available ($mm) |
$295 |
$3,302 |
||||
|
Amout payable to public units |
$21 |
@$20 |
||||
|
Amount payable to other units |
$260 |
|||||
|
Surplus |
$14 |
|||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Cheniere Enrgy Prt CQP |
$3,302 |
25.0 |
-381 |
1.8 |
-21.1 |
8% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Anticipated payout of $1.70 per unit, or 8.5% |
||||||
|
Compare & contrast |
Initial Div |
% |
||||
|
IPO |
based on |
IPO |
Price |
change |
||
|
Date |
on IPO price |
Price |
3/19/97 |
from IPO |
||
|
Duncan Energy Ptr (DEP) |
Jan 30, 07 |
7.6% |
$21.00 |
25.78 |
8.7% |
|
|
Legacy Reserve (LGCY) |
Jan 11, 07 |
8.6% |
$19.00 |
25.35 |
9.6% |
|
|
MV Oil Trust (MVO) |
Jan 18, 07 |
10.0% |
$20.00 |
24.48 |
9.1% |
|
|
Targa Resources (NGLS) |
Feb 8, 07 |
6.4% |
$21.00 |
25.75 |
8.7% |
|
|
Cheniere Enrgy Prt CQP |
8.5% |
|||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Limited partnership formed in November 2006 by Cheniere Energy, Inc (LNG, $1.65bb market |
||||||
|
cap). |
||||||
|
. Wholly-owned subsidiary, Sabine Pass LNG, will develop, own and operate the Sabine Pass |
||||||
|
LNG receiving terminal currently under construction in western Cameron Parish, Louisiana on the |
||||||
|
Sabine Pass Channel. |
||||||
|
Take or pay contracts |
||||||
|
All of the capacity has been contracted for under three 20-year, firm commitment terminal use |
||||||
|
agreements, or TUAs. |
||||||
|
. Each customer must make payments on a "take-or-pay" basis, which means that the customer |
||||||
|
will be obligated to pay the full contracted amount of monthly fees whether or not it uses any of its |
||||||
|
reserved capacity. |
||||||
|
. Provided the Sabine Pass LNG receiving terminal has achieved the required level of commercial |
||||||
|
operation, which CQP expects will occur in the third quarter of 2008, these "take-or-pay" TUA |
||||||
|
payments will be made as follows: |
||||||
|
Expects to pay $.425 on a quarterly basis |
||||||
|
. CQP is a development stage company without any revenues, operating cash flows or operating |
||||||
|
history and does not expect that revenues from its take or pay contracts with Total and Chevron to |
||||||
|
begin until the second and third quarter of 2009, respectively. Therefore, does not expect to |
||||||
|
generate sufficient cash from operations to fund distributions to unitholders until the third quarter |
||||||
|
of 2009. |
||||||
|
. Prior to June 30, 2009, we will use funds from the distribution reserve to pay the initial quarterly |
||||||
|
distribution of $0.425 on all of our outstanding common units, as well as related distributions to |
||||||
|
Use of $97mm in IPO proceeds from sales of 5.2mm units |
||||||
|
The parent will sell 7.3mm units and receive about $132mm) |
||||||
|
. All of the net proceeds to purchase U.S. treasury securities to fund a distribution reserve to pay |
||||||
|
the $0.425 initial quarterly distribution on all common units, as well as related distributions to our |
||||||
|
general partner, through the distribution made in respect of the quarter ending June 30, 2009 |
||||||
|
. The selling (parent/sponsor) unitholder expects to receive $132.0 million in net proceeds |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Glu Mobile |
GLUU, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
Publishes games for mobile telephones |
Post-IPO shrs: 28.4mm |
|||||
|
San Mateo, CA |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Rev ($mm) |
$2 |
$7 |
$26 |
$46 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Gross profit |
83% |
76% |
50% |
66% |
$312 |
|
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($3.8) |
($8.3) |
($17.9) |
($12.3) |
@$11 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
-211.1% |
-118.6% |
-69.9% |
-26.6% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Glu Mobile (GLUU) |
$312 |
5.5 |
-34 |
2.5 |
3.9 |
26% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. A leading global publisher of mobile games. |
||||||
|
. Developed and published a portfolio of more than 100 casual and traditional games to appeal to a |
||||||
|
broad cross section of the over one billion subscribers served by more than 150 wireless carriers |
||||||
|
and other distributors. |
||||||
|
. Creates games and related applications based on third-party licensed brands and other intellectual |
||||||
|
property, as well as on original brands and intellectual property. |
||||||
|
Industry Overview |
||||||
|
50% annual expected compound growth |
||||||
|
. Juniper Research, a market research firm, in its June 2006 "Mobile Games: Subscription & |
||||||
|
Download, 2006-2011" report, estimates that the worldwide market for mobile games will grow |
||||||
|
from $3.1 billion in 2006 to $10.5 billion in 2009, a compound annual growth rate of 50.2%. |
||||||
|
. "The face of mobile entertainment is expected to change significantly over the next five years as |
||||||
|
next-generation mobile services continue to be rolled out," said Bruce Gibson, an analyst with |
||||||
|
Juniper. |
||||||
|
Revenue model |
||||||
|
. Generates the vast majority of revenues from wireless carriers that market and distribute GLUU's |
||||||
|
games. |
||||||
|
. These carriers generally charge a one-time purchase fee or a monthly subscription fee on their |
||||||
|
subscribers' phone bills when the subscribers download our games to their mobile phones |
||||||
|
Customer concentration for the year ended Dec 31, 2006 |
||||||
|
> Four customers accounted for 54% of revenue |
||||||
|
. Verizon Wireless: 20.6% |
||||||
|
. Sprint Nextel: 12.6 |
||||||
|
. Cingular Wireless: 11.3% |
||||||
|
. Vodafone: 10.6% |
||||||
|
> In 2006, the largest wireless carrier customers in each region by revenues were |
||||||
|
. North America: Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel, Cingular Wireless and T-Mobile USA |
||||||
|
. Europe: Vodafone, Hutchinson 3G, O2 and Orange |
||||||
|
. Latin America: TelCel and Vivo |
||||||
|
. Australia: Hutchinson 3G Australia |
||||||
|
. Asia Pacific: Vodafone and New Zealand Telecom |
||||||
|
Top line revenue |
||||||
|
. Revenues increased $20.5 million, or 80.0%, from $25.7 million in 2005 to $46.2 million in |
||||||
|
2006, almost entirely as a result of volume increases. |
||||||
|
. The increase resulted from sales of games that released in 2006, including Ice Age 2, Diner Dash |
||||||
|
and Super K.O. Boxing, and sales of games acquired from iFone. Revenues in 2006 from games |
||||||
|
released in 2006 were $12.6 million. |
||||||
|
. Revenues in 2006 from games released prior to 2006 declined by $767,000 from the revenues |
||||||
|
derived from those games in 2005. |
||||||
|
> Acquisition of iFone games |
||||||
|
. Revenues from iFone games from March 29, 2006, when iFone was acquired, to December 31, |
||||||
|
2006 totaled approximately $8.7 million, primarily in Europe and the United States. |
||||||
|
. By utilizing carrier relationships and our marketing and development resources, GLUU was able |
||||||
|
to increase worldwide distribution and handset porting of iFone games and thus to increase |
||||||
|
significantly the revenues derived from the licenses that we acquired from iFone. |
||||||
|
> Top 10 games |
||||||
|
. Revenues from top ten games increased from $13.5 million in 2005 to $24.6 million in 2006 |
||||||
|
. International revenues, defined as revenues generated from carriers whose principal operations |
||||||
|
are located outside the United States, increased $10.0 million from $10.7 million in 2005 to $20.7 |
||||||
|
million in 2006. A majority of this increase resulted from the acquisition of iFone in 2006. |
||||||
|
Games |
||||||
|
. Games based on licensed intellectual property include Deer Hunter, Diner Dash, Monopoly, |
||||||
|
Sonic the Hedgehog, World Series of Poker and Zuma. |
||||||
|
. Original games based on GLUU's own intellectual property include Alpha Wing, Ancient |
||||||
|
Empires, Blackjack Hustler, Brain Genius, Stranded and Super K.O. Boxing. |
||||||
|
Ranked in top three during 2006 4th quarter |
||||||
|
One of the top three mobile game publishers during the fourth quarter of 2006 in terms of mobile |
||||||
|
game market share in North America, |
||||||
|
. As measured by NPD Group, Inc., a market research firm, in its December 2006 "Mobile Game |
||||||
|
Track Highlight Report," |
||||||
|
. And in terms of unit sales volume in North America and Europe among titles tracked by |
||||||
|
m:metrics, another market research firm. |
||||||
|
Mobile games versus console games |
||||||
|
. Once developed, mobile games, may need to be customized, or ported, to more than 1,000 |
||||||
|
different handset models, many with different technological requirements. |
||||||
|
. Therefore, the ability to port mobile games quickly and cost effectively can be a competitive |
||||||
|
differentiator among mobile game publishers and a barrier to entry for other potential market |
||||||
|
entrants. |
||||||
|
Recent valuation for stock options |
||||||
|
. On December 13, 2006, January 22, 2007 and January 25, 2007, granted options with an exercise |
||||||
|
price of $10.65 per share. |
||||||
|
. The fair value of common stock as of September 7, 2006 was $10.53 per share based upon Duff |
||||||
|
& Phelps' retrospectively prepared valuation report, which was finalized on October 25, 2006. |
||||||
|
. The fair value of our common stock as of December 31, 2006 changed minimally to $10.65 per |
||||||
|
share based upon Duff & Phelps' retrospectively prepared valuation report, which was finalized on |
||||||
|
February 13, 2007. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Publicly held: Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS) $15bb market cap (EA Mobile division), THQ Inc. |
||||||
|
(THQI), $2.2bb market cap |
||||||
|
. Primary competitors include Digital Chocolate, Electronic Arts (EA Mobile), Gameloft, Hands |
||||||
|
On Mobile, I-play, Namco and THQ, |
||||||
|
. Electronic Arts has the largest market share of any company in the mobile games market. |
||||||
|
. In the future, likely competitors include major media companies, traditional video game |
||||||
|
publishers, content aggregators, mobile software providers and independent mobile game |
||||||
|
publishers. |
||||||
|
. EA entered the mobile games market in 2005 and promptly acquired established player Jamdat |
||||||
|
for $680 million on February 15, 2006. For the last quarter reported by Jamdat (Sept, 2005), |
||||||
|
Jamdat reported $20mm in revenue and $1.4mm in after-tax profits. |
||||||
|
Use of $72mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
$10.9 million to repay loan to Pinnacle Ventures |
||||||
|
Balance for |
||||||
|
o expansion of domestic and international sales and marketing activities, which may include |
||||||
|
increasing the number of direct sales and marketing personnel and investing in advertising and |
||||||
|
marketing to increase brand awareness for specific games and for the Glu brand; |
||||||
|
o expansion of international development and quality assurance capabilities in Asia Pacific, Latin |
||||||
|
America and EMEA, which may include hiring additional personnel in current offices and opening |
||||||
|
new offices to expand development and porting capacity; |
||||||
|
o activities to increase carrier and other distribution channels; |
||||||
|
o possible advances for license agreements |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated March 11 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 12 week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
BigBand Netwrks BBND |
$628 |
2.5 |
18 |
6.3 |
6.5 |
19% |
|
network platforms for service providers: B-, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 57mm |
|||||
|
FCStone Group (FCSX) |
$380 |
0.2 |
15 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
28% |
|
commodity risk management consulting: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 17mm |
|||||
|
Photowatt Tech (PHWT) |
$440 |
3.3 |
-51 |
1.7 |
1.7 |
40% |
|
solar cells & modules: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 27.5mm |
|||||
|
Tongjitang ChiMed TCM |
$536 |
8.6 |
31 |
2.9 |
3.0 |
30% |
|
modernized trad Chinese medicine: C+, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 33.5mm ADS equivalents |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 12 week analysis |
||||||
|
BigBand Networks |
BBND, B-, 8 |
|||||
|
network platforms for service providers |
Post-IPO shrs: 57mm |
|||||
|
Redwood City, California |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$36 |
$98 |
$176 |
Cap (mm) |
||
|
Gross Profit % |
34% |
39% |
53% |
$628 |
||
|
Operating Income % |
-92% |
-23% |
7% |
@$11 |
||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($34.0) |
($25.5) |
$8.9 |
|||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-96% |
-26% |
5% |
|||
|
L:ast four quarters |
||||||
|
March |
June |
Sept |
Dec |
|||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$33 |
$38 |
$43 |
$63 |
||
|
Gross Profit % |
51% |
49% |
52% |
57% |
||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($1.0) |
($0.6) |
$1.6 |
$8.9 |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-3% |
-2% |
4% |
14% |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
BigBand Netwrks BEND |
$628 |
2.5 |
18 |
6.3 |
6.5 |
19% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
Develops, markets and sells network-based platforms that enable cable operators and telephone |
||||||
|
companies, collectively called service providers, to offer video, voice and data services across |
||||||
|
coaxial, fiber and copper networks. |
||||||
|
Profitable |
||||||
|
Has been profitable on a quarterly basis since the three months ended September 30, 2006, and |
||||||
|
first achieved profitability on an annual basis in 2006. |
||||||
|
Intelligent, High-Bandwidth Video Networks Are Needed |
||||||
|
. Service providers derive most of their revenue from consumer subscriptions and advertising |
||||||
|
. Service providers are increasingly bundling disparate video, voice and data services into |
||||||
|
integrated offerings, also known as "triple-play" services. |
||||||
|
. Video is the most technically demanding, provides the richest user experience and currently |
||||||
|
offers the greatest revenue per subscriber of the triple-play services. |
||||||
|
. As of December 2006, Yankee Group Research estimates that, on average, consumers spend $68 |
||||||
|
per month for digital video services compared to $47 for voice and $33 for data services. |
||||||
|
Applications |
||||||
|
. BEND software and hardware product applications are used by leading service providers |
||||||
|
worldwide to offer video, voice and data services to tens of millions of subscribers, 24 hours a |
||||||
|
day, seven days a week. |
||||||
|
. Has sold product applications to more than 100 customers globally, including Cablevision, |
||||||
|
Charter, Comcast, Cox, Time Warner Cable and Verizon, which are six of the ten largest service |
||||||
|
providers in the United States. |
||||||
|
First to implement |
||||||
|
. BEND believes it was the first to implement what BEND believes has become the industry's de |
||||||
|
facto network architecture for digital simulcast, an application that facilitates the insertion of |
||||||
|
advertising and the transmission of video in a digital format across a network while still providing |
||||||
|
service to analog subscribers. |
||||||
|
. Product applications of Digital Simulcast, TelcoTV, Switched Broadcast, and High-Speed Data |
||||||
|
and Voice-over-IP are a combination of BEND's modular software and programmable video and |
||||||
|
data hardware platforms. |
||||||
|
Limited number of customers |
||||||
|
. Due to the nature of the cable and telecommunications industries, sells products to a limited |
||||||
|
number of large customers, which have varied over time. |
||||||
|
. For the quarter ended December 31, 2006 and the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and |
||||||
|
2004, derived approximately 90%, 79%, 69% and 61% of net revenues from the top five |
||||||
|
customers, respectively. |
||||||
|
. In 2006, Comcast, Cox, Time Warner Cable and Verizon each represented 10% or more of net |
||||||
|
revenues. |
||||||
|
. In 2005, Adelphia, Cox and Time Warner Cable each represented 10% or more of net revenues |
||||||
|
. In 2004, Adelphia, Comcast, Cox and Time Warner Cable each represented 10% or more of net |
||||||
|
revenues. |
||||||
|
History |
||||||
|
. Founded in December 1998, and through 2001 was engaged principally in research and |
||||||
|
development. |
||||||
|
. First generated meaningful product revenues in 2002, principally from the initial media |
||||||
|
processing platform designed for video. |
||||||
|
. Since 2003, expanded customer base to include six of the ten largest service providers in the |
||||||
|
United States, including Cablevision, Comcast, Charter, Cox, Time Warner Cable and Verizon. |
||||||
|
Acquisition |
||||||
|
. To expand the breadth of products, in June 2004, acquired the high-speed data equipment BAS |
||||||
|
division of ADC Telecommunications, Inc. |
||||||
|
. From 2003 through 2005, experienced significant revenue growth that was derived primarily |
||||||
|
from cable operators. |
||||||
|
. Beginning in 2005, commenced sales efforts to telephone companies and began recognizing |
||||||
|
significant revenues from one of these companies in 2006. |
||||||
|
Intellectual property |
||||||
|
. As of February 15, 2007, BEND held 26 issued U.S. patents, 16 of which relate to video products |
||||||
|
and ten of which relate to CMTS products. |
||||||
|
. Additionally, had 58 U.S. patent applications pending, 33 of which relate to video products and |
||||||
|
25 of which relate to CMTS products. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Includes Cisco Systems and Motorola |
||||||
|
Use of $74mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 7.5mm shares |
||||||
|
(shareholders intend to sell 3.2mm shares) |
||||||
|
. Repay $14mm in debt |
||||||
|
. Remaining net proceeds for working capital, capital expenditures and other general corporate |
||||||
|
purposes. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
FCStone Group |
FCSX, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
commodity risk management consulting |
Aug 31 fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 17mm |
||||
|
West Des Moines, Iowa |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Nov, 05* |
Nov, 06* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$1,624 |
$1,401 |
$1,295 |
$350 |
$500 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Cost of commodities sold |
94% |
91% |
86% |
89% |
88% |
$380 |
|
* 3 months ended Nov 30 |
@$22.5 |
|||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$6.4 |
$6.6 |
$15.3 |
$3.4 |
$6.3 |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
0.4% |
0.5% |
1.2% |
1.0% |
1.3% |
|
|
% change |
% contribution |
|||||
|
Nov, 05* |
Nov, 06* |
Nov, 06* |
Nov, 06* |
|||
|
Rev net of commdities cost |
$39.3 |
$57.3 |
46% |
|||
|
. Gross profit on commodities |
$4.5 |
$6.5 |
44% |
11% |
||
|
. Commissons & Clearing Fees (CCF) |
$23.0 |
$33.0 |
43% |
58% |
||
|
. Serivces, consulting, brokerage |
$6.9 |
$9.1 |
32% |
16% |
||
|
. Interest |
$4.3 |
$8.4 |
95% |
15% |
||
|
. Oither |
$0.5 |
$0.5 |
0% |
|||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
FCStone Group (FCSX) |
$380 |
0.2 |
15 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
28% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. An integrated commodity risk management (C&RM*) company providing risk management |
||||||
|
consulting and transaction execution services to commercial commodity intermediaries, end-users |
||||||
|
and producers. |
||||||
|
* FCSX's C&RM segment operates as an integrated FCM (futures commission merchant), which |
||||||
|
is an organization which solicits or accepts orders to buy or sell futures contracts or commodity |
||||||
|
options and accepts money or other assets from customers in connection with such orders |
||||||
|
. Assists primarily middle-market customers in optimizing their profit margins and mitigating |
||||||
|
commodity price risk. |
||||||
|
. In addition to risk management consulting services, operates one of the leading independent |
||||||
|
clearing and execution platforms for exchange-traded futures and options contracts. |
||||||
|
. In fiscal 2006, we served more than 7,500 customers and transacted more than 47.8 million |
||||||
|
contracts in the exchange-traded and OTC (over-the-counter) markets. |
||||||
|
. As a natural complement to commodity risk management consulting services, also assists |
||||||
|
customers with the financing, transportation and merchandising of their physical commodity |
||||||
|
inventories. |
||||||
|
Industry Growth |
||||||
|
. The total international notional value outstanding of exchange-traded and OTC derivative |
||||||
|
contracts has expanded rapidly in recent years, evidencing the large growth potential of the |
||||||
|
commodity risk management industry. |
||||||
|
. According to data from the Bank for International Settlements, the notional value outstanding of |
||||||
|
exchange-traded contracts has grown at a CAGR of 27.1% over the past seven and a half years, |
||||||
|
while the OTC market has grown at a CAGR of 22.6% over the same time period. |
||||||
|
Customer Acceptance of Risk Management |
||||||
|
. The growing sophistication of company managers and the heightened expectations of investors |
||||||
|
have increased the acceptance of commodity risk management strategies. Demand for risk |
||||||
|
management consulting services is growing in industries that have not traditionally been |
||||||
|
significant users of hedging techniques and the derivatives market. |
||||||
|
. This increased demand drives FCSX's fee revenue from risk management consulting services |
||||||
|
and commission and interest income generated from the trading activity of our customers. |
||||||
|
. As FCSX's expands its customer base beyond the traditional users of derivative products, |
||||||
|
FCXS's ability to provide an analysis of the commodity markets and advise customers about how |
||||||
|
to manage the commodity risk inherent in their businesses will continue to be an important driver |
||||||
|
in its ability to generate future revenues. |
||||||
|
Industry segments |
||||||
|
. The commodity risk management industry is noted for both its fragmented nature and its overall |
||||||
|
breadth, as it serves commodities intermediaries, end-users and producers. |
||||||
|
. The industry can generally be segmented into providers of either one, or both, of two services to |
||||||
|
customers: risk management consulting, and trade execution and clearing services. |
||||||
|
Two services |
||||||
|
. Risk management consulting is an advisory function by which a company advises its customer |
||||||
|
on strategies to manage its commodity risk. |
||||||
|
. Trade execution and clearing services are performed by serving as an intermediary between a |
||||||
|
customer and a commodity exchange or other counterparty. |
||||||
|
FCSX operations in four segments |
||||||
|
. Commodity and Risk Management Services ("C&RM") |
||||||
|
. Clearing and Execution Services |
||||||
|
. Financial Services |
||||||
|
. Grain Merchandising |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
> The commodity and risk management industry can generally be classified into four basic types |
||||||
|
of companies: (1) pure consultants, (2) clearing FCMs (futures commission merchants) providing |
||||||
|
trade execution but not broad-based consulting services, (3) captive businesses providing |
||||||
|
consulting and trade execution as divisions of financial institutions or larger commodity-oriented |
||||||
|
companies, and (4) integrated FCMs (futures commission merchants) providing both consulting |
||||||
|
and trade execution from an independent platform. |
||||||
|
> FCSX believes that its C&RM segment, which operates as an integrated FCM (futures |
||||||
|
commission merchant), serves the needs of middle-market companies that require both the |
||||||
|
personalized consulting services provided by FCXS's risk management consultants and the trade |
||||||
|
execution services offered as an FCM. |
||||||
|
> Exchange-traded futures & options execution |
||||||
|
. Competitors in the exchange-traded futures and options sector include international brokerage |
||||||
|
firms, national brokerage firms, regional brokerage firms (both cooperatives and non |
||||||
|
cooperatives) as well as local introducing brokers, with competition driven by price level and |
||||||
|
quality of service. |
||||||
|
. Many of these competitors offer OTC trading programs as well. In addition, there are a number |
||||||
|
of financial firms and physical commodities firms that participate in the OTC markets, both |
||||||
|
directly in competition with FCSX and indirectly through firms like FCXS. |
||||||
|
> Financial services segment |
||||||
|
Compete with traditional lenders, including banks and asset-based lenders. |
||||||
|
. Also compete with specialized investment groups that seek to earn an investment return based on |
||||||
|
commodities transactions. |
||||||
|
> Grain merchandising |
||||||
|
Competition is intense and profit margins are low. |
||||||
|
. Grain merchandising operations compete with numerous larger grain merchandisers, including |
||||||
|
major grain merchandising companies such as Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., Cargill, Incorporated, |
||||||
|
CHS Inc., ConAgra Foods, Inc., Bunge Ltd., and Louis Dreyfus Group, |
||||||
|
. Each of which handles grain volumes of more than one billion bushels annually. |
||||||
|
Use of $95mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
o to redeem $45mm of stock (2,159,997 shares), 15% of shares pre-IPO |
||||||
|
o pay $26.3 to reduce debt |
||||||
|
o increase regulatory capital of the FCM (futures commission merchant) subsidiary by $15.0 |
||||||
|
million |
||||||
|
o $8.9 million for general corporate purposes, which may include acquisitions, capital expenditures |
||||||
|
and additions to working capital. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Photowatt Tech |
PHWT, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
solar cells & modules |
March 31 fiscal |
Post-IPO shrs: 27.5mm |
||||
|
Cambridge, Ontario, Canada |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Dec 05* |
Dec 06* |
IPO Mkt |
|
Rev ($mm) |
$66 |
$113 |
$121 |
$87 |
$99 |
Cap (mm) |
|
Gross profit |
20% |
20% |
26% |
24% |
27% |
$440 |
|
* 9 months ended Dec 31 |
@$16 |
|||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$1.1 |
$6.8 |
($98.0) |
($0.1) |
($6.5) |
|
|
Profit (loss) % |
1.7% |
6.0% |
-81.0% |
-0.2% |
-6.6% |
|
|
fiscal 2006 includes $94mm in assest impairment charge of R&D capitalized assets |
||||||
|
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
Dec 05* |
Dec 06* |
||
|
Photowatt operating |
* 9 months ended Dec 31 |
|||||
|
net of Spheral Solar |
$3 |
$11 |
$20 |
$12 |
$14 |
|
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Photowatt Tech (PHWT) |
$440 |
3.3 |
-51 |
1.7 |
1.7 |
40% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
7 |
|
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Designs, manufactures and sells photovoltaic products, commonly referred to as solar cells and |
||||||
|
modules. Solar cells and modules provide clean, renewable energy by converting sunlight into |
||||||
|
electricity through a process known as the photovoltaic effect. |
||||||
|
. Operates through two segments, Photowatt International, the core business that is based on a |
||||||
|
wafer technology, and Spheral Solar™, a development project that is based on a spheral |
||||||
|
technology. |
||||||
|
Photowatt International |
||||||
|
. Designs, manufactures and sells solar modules and installation kits, and provides solar power |
||||||
|
system design and other value-added services, principally in Western Europe. |
||||||
|
. Most of Photowatt International's products are manufactured in the Photowatt France facility |
||||||
|
outside of Lyon, France. |
||||||
|
. Photowatt USA, our facility in Albuquerque, New Mexico, performs certain module assembly |
||||||
|
operations for Photowatt International. Photowatt International, through its French and U.S. |
||||||
|
operations, sells its products under the Photowatt and Matrix brands to a network of independent |
||||||
|
solar power systems distributors and installers. |
||||||
|
. Solar modules manufactured by Photowatt International are used by businesses, institutions and |
||||||
|
homeowners to generate electric power. Photowatt International has been developing and selling |
||||||
|
photovoltaic products since 1979. |
||||||
|
. Photowatt International accounted for all of our combined revenue for our fiscal 2006 and for the |
||||||
|
nine months ended December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
Spheral Solar |
||||||
|
Is a development project for a light weight, flexible crystalline solar module designed to compete |
||||||
|
with both conventional crystalline and thin film technologies. |
||||||
|
. PHWT's Spheral Solar technology incorporates thousands of tiny silicon spheres, bonded |
||||||
|
between thin, flexible aluminum foil substrates to form solar cells. |
||||||
|
. PHWT believes that its Spheral Solar technology, if successfully developed, would have |
||||||
|
advantages over conventional crystalline solar cells, including lower silicon utilization, better |
||||||
|
aesthetics and greater physical flexibility. |
||||||
|
. However, regarding PHWT's "Spheral Solar Technology," the technological and |
||||||
|
commercialization challenges associated with the development of spheral technology are |
||||||
|
substantial, and PHWT may discontinue development of this technology at any time. |
||||||
|
Business Strategy |
||||||
|
o Expand annual integrated manufacturing capacity. In response to demand for products, which is |
||||||
|
currently greater than the capacity to produce them, intends to increase annual integrated |
||||||
|
manufacturing capacity to approximately 400 MW by the end of calendar year 2011. |
||||||
|
o Establish reliable, long-term silicon supply. Strategy is to establish a long-term supply of |
||||||
|
polysilicon and polysilicon alternatives from a variety of sources to support continued growth. |
||||||
|
o Continue to invest in research and development to improve cell efficiency. Expects to continue |
||||||
|
to devote substantial resources to research and development efforts, either through direct |
||||||
|
investment or collaborative activities, aimed at increasing the efficiency of solar cells and reducing |
||||||
|
silicon usage per watt. |
||||||
|
o Commercialize Spheral Solar technology. Working on development and process engineering in |
||||||
|
an effort to commercialize Spheral Solar technology, which PHWT acquired in 1997. |
||||||
|
Spheral Solar Technology |
||||||
|
. Currently evaluating a proposed partnership and cross-licensing arrangement with Clean Venture |
||||||
|
21 Corporation and Fujipream Corporation, Japanese companies with expertise in the |
||||||
|
development and manufacture of solar products, to assist PHWT in further developing and |
||||||
|
commercializing Spheral Solar technology, and has signed a non-binding letter of intent with these |
||||||
|
companies. |
||||||
|
. However, the technological and commercialization challenges associated with the development |
||||||
|
of spheral technology are substantial, and PHWT may discontinue development of the technology |
||||||
|
at any time. |
||||||
|
. For the year ended March 31, 2006, PHWT recognized an after-tax, non-cash asset impairment |
||||||
|
charge of $94.3 million pre-tax due to the uncertainty in resolving technological challenges |
||||||
|
associated with commercialization and resulting delays in realizing cash flows. |
||||||
|
. Additionally, based in part on a report delivered by outside consultants, PHWT concluded that |
||||||
|
attempting to overcome certain technological challenges relating to Spheral Solar technology on |
||||||
|
PHWT's would involve significant additional time and costs |
||||||
|
Silicon Supply |
||||||
|
. Polysilicon is the primary raw material used in the production of solar cells and modules. Silicon |
||||||
|
is currently in short supply and its price has increased significantly over the past 18 months. |
||||||
|
. PHWT believes that it has secured or identified sources of silicon for Photowatt International's |
||||||
|
planned capacity to the end of September 2008. |
||||||
|
. The majority of these silicon requirements are expected to be filled by inventory on hand and by |
||||||
|
confirmed purchase orders. PHWT expects that the balance of requirements will be satisfied by |
||||||
|
outstanding purchase orders with existing suppliers and by other identified sources. |
||||||
|
. Currently producing solar cells and modules using refined metallurgical silicon, and in the third |
||||||
|
quarter of fiscal 2007, produced 7% of solar modules using refined metallurgical silicon. |
||||||
|
. Based on contractual commitments for the supply of refined metallurgical silicon that we have |
||||||
|
entered into or expect to enter into, PHWT believes that in excess of two thirds of its total silicon |
||||||
|
requirement during fiscal 2008 will be met with refined metallurgical silicon. |
||||||
|
Facilities |
||||||
|
. Lease a building from ATS with 193,000 square feet of space. |
||||||
|
. This building also houses PHWT Spheral Solar technology development facility. Photowatt's |
||||||
|
facility occupies a total of 130,000 square feet of manufacturing space in a building PHWT owns |
||||||
|
near Lyon, France. |
||||||
|
. Photowatt USA leases a sales and module assembly facility in Albuquerque, New Mexico. |
||||||
|
Spin-off of ATS |
||||||
|
. Parent company, ATS, is a leading designer and producer of turn-key automated manufacturing |
||||||
|
and test systems, which are used primarily by multinational corporations operating in a variety of |
||||||
|
industries including: automotive, computer/ electronics, healthcare, and consumer products. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, ATS employed 3,500 people at 25 manufacturing facilities in Canada, |
||||||
|
the United States, Europe, southeast Asia and China. ATS' shares are traded on the Toronto Stock |
||||||
|
Exchange under the symbol ATA. |
||||||
|
. In March 2006, ATS announced that, following a review of the strategic alternatives for its solar |
||||||
|
business, it decided to pursue an initial public offering of the solar business segment. |
||||||
|
Patents and Trademarks |
||||||
|
. Holds a number of patents, primarily in connection with various aspects of Spheral Solar |
||||||
|
technology and also in connection with the ability to purify polysilicon fines, which is significant |
||||||
|
to our silicon supply strategy. |
||||||
|
. The patents that PHWT's consider to be of the greatest importance to Spheral Solar technology |
||||||
|
will expire between 2008 and 2023 and has been issued primarily in the United States, although |
||||||
|
PHWT's also has patent protection in certain jurisdictions in Europe and Asia for some of the |
||||||
|
same technology that is covered by PHWT's U.S. patents. |
||||||
|
. Also holds a number of patents in the United States, France and other European countries, which |
||||||
|
will expire between 2007 and 2024, relating to some of the technology used in Photowatt |
||||||
|
International. |
||||||
|
. The patents relating to the technology used in Photowatt International cover a small portion of |
||||||
|
the overall end-to-end manufacturing process, the balance of the technology being either public |
||||||
|
domain technology or technology developed by us and treated as trade secrets |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. Competitors include companies such as Sharp, Q-Cells, Kyocera, Sanyo, Mitsubishi, Schott, |
||||||
|
Suntech, Sunpower and BP Solar. |
||||||
|
. Many competitors are developing or currently producing products based on new solar |
||||||
|
technologies, including amorphous silicon, ribbon, sheet and nano technologies, which they |
||||||
|
believe will ultimately cost the same as or less than crystalline technologies similar to PHWT on a |
||||||
|
cost per watt basis. |
||||||
|
. The two ribbon technologies on the market launched commercially at about 11% efficiency with |
||||||
|
a 10 g/W silicon consumption. These technologies are currently limited to small cell areas of 100-125 cm2. |
||||||
|
. PHWT's polysilicon wafer technology has a higher efficiency at the same silicon utilization and |
||||||
|
on larger cell sizes. |
||||||
|
. PHTW's Spheral Solar technology, if successfully developed, could combine 11% targeted |
||||||
|
efficiency with the flexibility of thin film technology in one module and is expected to have a |
||||||
|
lower silicon utilization than conventional crystalline devices. Most amorphous technologies use |
||||||
|
double glass construction to increase life expectations beyond ten years, and commercial launches |
||||||
|
for these technologies were on products with approximately 6.5% efficiency. |
||||||
|
. Nano-technologies, which are not yet commercialized, are expected to have close to 5% |
||||||
|
efficiency with life expectancies of several years for double glass construction. |
||||||
|
. Compared to these competing technologies, PHWT believes the majority of its products have |
||||||
|
higher efficiencies and longer lifetimes without the need for double glass construction. |
||||||
|
Use of $158mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. Finance capital expenditures associated with the first and second phases of manufacturing |
||||||
|
capacity expansion plan at Photowatt International estimated to be $113 million |
||||||
|
. Finance $12 million in capital expenditures in connection with the first phase of the proposed |
||||||
|
business partnership and cross-licensing agreement for developing PHWT's Spheral Solar |
||||||
|
technology, |
||||||
|
. Repay $9 million of debt |
||||||
|
. Balance for general corporate purposes, including the procurement of silicon supply contracts, |
||||||
|
working capital and investments that will enhance manufacturing, silicon supply or research and |
||||||
|
development capabilities |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Tongjitang Chinese Med |
TCM, C+, 8 |
|||||
|
modernized trad Chinese medicine |
Post-IPO shrs: 33.5mm ADS equivalents |
|||||
|
Shenzhen, Guangdong, China |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$62 |
Cap (mm) |
||||
|
Gross profit % |
46% |
59% |
67% |
$536 |
||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
$17.2 |
@$16 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
5% |
32% |
28% |
|||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Tongjitang ChiMed TCM |
$536 |
8.6 |
31 |
2.9 |
3.0 |
30% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
American Depositary Shares, each ADS represents four shares |
||||||
|
Tax issues |
||||||
|
. Currently, Tongjitang Pharmaceutical is entitled to (a) an exemption from the national enterprise |
||||||
|
income tax for 2006 and 2007, and (b) a 7.5% national enterprise income tax rate for 2008, 2009 |
||||||
|
and 2010. |
||||||
|
. After 2010, Tongjitang Pharmaceutical will be subject to a 15.0% tax rate as long as it maintains |
||||||
|
its manufacturing FIE status in the Guiyang economic and technological development zone. |
||||||
|
Uniform tax rate in process |
||||||
|
. However, since China joined the World Trade Organization, or WTO, in November 2001, |
||||||
|
preferential tax treatments have been criticized as not being WTO-compliant. On October 4, 2006, |
||||||
|
China Securities Daily reported that the State Council of China recently approved a draft bill to |
||||||
|
apply a uniform tax rate to both foreign-invested enterprises and domestic enterprises and plans to |
||||||
|
submit this draft bill to the National People's Congress, the Chinese legislature, for review and |
||||||
|
possible enactment in March 2007. |
||||||
|
. According to this report, the uniform tax rates range from 24.0% to 27.0% and there is likely to |
||||||
|
be a three to five year transition period for foreign-invested enterprises during which they would |
||||||
|
be able to continue to enjoy their existing preferential tax treatments. |
||||||
|
. If the uniform tax regime is adopted, then the effective tax rate of Tongjitang Pharmaceutical |
||||||
|
could increase significantly |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Specialty pharmaceutical company in China |
||||||
|
. Flagship product, Xianling Gubao, is the leading traditional Chinese medicine for the treatment |
||||||
|
of osteoporosis in China |
||||||
|
. Sales of Xianling Gubao accounted for 68.7%, 66.6% and 77.2% of net revenues in 2004, 2005 |
||||||
|
and 2006, respectively. |
||||||
|
. TCM expects that the sales of Xianling Gubao will continue to comprise a substantial majority of |
||||||
|
revenues in the near future. |
||||||
|
Xianling Gubao product |
||||||
|
Approved in 2002 by the SFDA as both a prescription medicine and an OTC medicine for the |
||||||
|
treatment of osteoporosis. |
||||||
|
> Hospitals. In 2004, 2005 and 2006, 1,602, 1,982 and 2,257 Chinese hospitals, respectively, |
||||||
|
included Xianling Gubao on their lists of approved prescription medicines, or formularies |
||||||
|
. Under the PRC Ministry of Health hospital classification system, the best and largest hospitals in |
||||||
|
China are designated as "Class 3" hospitals, followed by lower-ranked "Class 2" and "Class 1" |
||||||
|
hospitals. |
||||||
|
. Of the formulary hospitals for Xianling Gubao, 361 in 2004 and 441 in 2005 were "Class 3" |
||||||
|
hospitals, representing 38.7% and 46.6% of all "Class 3" hospitals in China, respectively. |
||||||
|
. The number of "Class 3" formulary hospitals for Xianling Gubao increased to 488 in 2006. |
||||||
|
> Retail stocking pharmacies |
||||||
|
. Since May 2004, has also been marketing Xianling Gubao as an OTC medicine to retail |
||||||
|
pharmacies. |
||||||
|
. In 2005 and 2006, over 20,000 and 37,000 retail pharmacies in China stocked Xianling Gubao, |
||||||
|
> National catalog |
||||||
|
. In September 2004, Xianling Gubao was added to the national medicine catalog of the National |
||||||
|
Medical Insurance Program, a government-administered medical insurance program, which is the |
||||||
|
largest in China. |
||||||
|
. As of the end of 2006, the number of participants enrolled in this program was 157.4 million, |
||||||
|
according to a statement made on January 18, 2007 by the Ministry of Labor and Social Security, |
||||||
|
or the MLSS. |
||||||
|
. According to a statement made by the MLSS on February 21, 2006, the Chinese government |
||||||
|
intends to expand program enrollment to 300 million by the end of 2010. |
||||||
|
Seasonal Variations |
||||||
|
Sales of Xianling Gubao are affected by seasonal variations in consumer demand. In most regions |
||||||
|
in China, winter starts in the last quarter of each year. The |
||||||
|
. Lower temperatures in winter normally result in a higher incidence of pain and other symptoms |
||||||
|
associated with osteoporosis, arthritic rheumatism and other bone-related diseases and conditions. |
||||||
|
. As a result, hospitals and retail pharmacies typically experience seasonal peaks in demand for |
||||||
|
Xianling Gubao in the last quarter of each year. |
||||||
|
. Accordingly, hospitals and retail pharmacies begin to stock greater quantities of Xianling Gubao |
||||||
|
in September, and the fourth quarter is our peak season for sales. |
||||||
|
. In the first quarter, strong winter-season sales are usually offset by the slow-down of businesses |
||||||
|
during the Chinese New Year holiday season that effectively lasts more than half a month. |
||||||
|
. During this holiday season, many businesses in China, including retail pharmacies and most |
||||||
|
departments in hospitals, are either closed or substantially reduce the level of their activities |
||||||
|
. Conversely, TCM typically experiences seasonal lows in demand for Xianling Gubao in |
||||||
|
summer, affecting sales in the third quarter |
||||||
|
Intellectual property |
||||||
|
. Owns 17 patents, all of which are registered in the PRC. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, we owned six invention patents and 11 external design patents. We |
||||||
|
also have 15 pending invention patent applications in China |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
. According to the 2006 China Pharmaceutical Market Research Report prepared by Compass |
||||||
|
International, a Beijing-based research company, in 2005 there were over 1,200 traditional |
||||||
|
Chinese medicine manufacturers in China (not including manufacturers of traditional sliced |
||||||
|
herbs). |
||||||
|
. Of these manufacturers, in 2005, large-sized manufacturers contributed to 27.4% of the total |
||||||
|
sales of this sector, compared to 30.3% and 42.3% of sales by small- and medium-sized |
||||||
|
manufacturers, respectively, according to the same research report. |
||||||
|
> TCM faces competition from other China-based manufacturers of traditional Chinese medicines. |
||||||
|
Primary traditional Chinese medicines competing with Xianling Gubao are: |
||||||
|
. Qiang Gu (Bone-Strengthening) Capsules, and |
||||||
|
. Gu Song Bao Capsules/Granules. |
||||||
|
> Qiang Gu Capsules are manufactured by Guizhou Fuhua Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. and Gu Song |
||||||
|
Bao Capsules are manufactured by Beijing Qihuang Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Both companies are |
||||||
|
PRC domestic pharmaceutical companies. |
||||||
|
. In addition, TCM faces competition from manufacturers of western medicine with similar |
||||||
|
curative effects, which therefore can be used as substitutes for TCM's traditional Chinese |
||||||
|
medicine products. |
||||||
|
. The major western medicines that compete with Xianling Gubao include (1) calcium |
||||||
|
supplements such as Osteoform, Caltrate and Gai Zhong Gai, (2) hormonal replacement therapies |
||||||
|
such as Livial, Premarin, Ipriflavone and Ranoxifene, (3) bisphosphonates such as Fosamax, and |
||||||
|
(4) calcitonin derivatives, such as elcatonin. |
||||||
|
. Except for Gai Zhong Gai, these western medicines are manufactured by the PRC subsidiaries of |
||||||
|
U.S.- or European-based pharmaceutical companies. |
||||||
|
. Many of these western medicines, including calcium supplements and bisphosphonates, are also |
||||||
|
included in the national and provincial medicine catalogs and therefore purchases of them are |
||||||
|
reimbursable to National Insurance Program participants. |
||||||
|
> The following sets forth the primary SFDA-approved medicines that compete with TCM's other |
||||||
|
principal products: |
||||||
|
. Alprazolam (Xanax) |
||||||
|
. Zolpidem (Ambien) |
||||||
|
. Flunarizine (Sibelium) |
||||||
|
Use of $119mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
. US$40.0 million to enhance marketing of Xianling Gubao and other products |
||||||
|
. US$10.0 million to strengthen the research and development infrastructure and broaden and |
||||||
|
commercialize the product pipeline |
||||||
|
. balance to fund working capital and for general corporate purposes, which may include product |
||||||
|
licensing and strategic acquisitions of businesses, business units |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Financial Performance & Scoring -- © 2007 Gaskins IPO Desktop/IPOdesktop |
||||||
|
Pre-IPO analysis, grading & scoring -- updated March 2 |
||||||
|
. Business Model Rating Criteria |
||||||
|
A = high growth market, potential leader; B = more competitive market; C= 'public venture capital' |
||||||
|
. Calculations |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Sales Ratio -- (Price / Sales) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market capitalization… |
Annualized Sales (based on recent results) |
|||||
|
(post-IPO # of shares times mid-point of IPO price range) |
||||||
|
. IPO Price to annualized Earnings (loss) -- (Price / Earnings) |
||||||
|
Numerator |
Denominator |
|||||
|
IPO market cap |
Annualized Earnings (loss) from the last quarter |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
SEARCH BY COMPANY |
In your browser use 'Edit/Find' to search for companies |
|||||
|
or ticker for analysis |
scheduled below |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 5 week IPO schedule |
||||||
|
Clearwire Corp (CLWR) |
$3,792 |
37.9 |
-13 |
2.2 |
2.0 |
13% |
|
wireless broadband networks: B-, 8 |
Post-IPO shrs: 158mm |
|||||
|
Xinhua Finance (XFML) |
$888 |
14.3 |
-404 |
2.8 |
2.8 |
34% |
|
Chinese media company: B-, 8 |
Post-IPO ADS equivalents: 68mm |
|||||
|
Sourcefire |
$300 |
6.7 |
-334 |
3.3 |
3.4 |
25% |
|
Computer network security: C+, 7 |
Post-IPO shrs: 23mm |
|||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
March 5 week analysis |
||||||
|
Clearwire Corp |
CLWR, B-, 8 |
|||||
|
wireless broadband networks |
Post-IPO shrs: 158mm |
|||||
|
Kirkland, WA |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||
|
Rev ($mm) |
$15 |
$34 |
$100 |
Cap (mm) |
||
|
Cost of Equip & Services% |
84% |
70% |
70% |
$3,792 |
||
|
SG&A |
158% |
317% |
215% |
@$20 |
||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($33.0) |
($140.0) |
($284.0) |
|||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-216% |
-418% |
-284% |
|||
|
Capital expenditures |
$80 |
$138 |
$152 |
|||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Clearwire Corp (CLWR) |
$3,792 |
37.9 |
-13 |
2.2 |
2.0 |
13% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
8 |
|
|
Summary |
||||||
|
CLWR could become a major company |
||||||
|
WiMax definition: |
||||||
|
. Trade name for a family of new technologies related to the IEEE 802.16 wireless standards. |
||||||
|
. Has the potential for very long range (5 - 30 miles) and high speeds. |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Builds and operates next generation wireless broadband networks that enable fast, simple, |
||||||
|
portable, reliable and affordable Internet communications. |
||||||
|
. CLWR's wireless broadband networks cover entire communities and deliver a high-speed |
||||||
|
Internet connection that not only creates a new communications path into the home or office, but |
||||||
|
also provides a broadband connection anytime and anywhere within the coverage area. |
||||||
|
. CLWR intends to evolve its network and services to facilitate a greater range of mobile |
||||||
|
communications services than currently offered. |
||||||
|
Expanded offerings |
||||||
|
. CLWR intends to introduce a PC Card for its Expedience network in the second half of this year |
||||||
|
that will facilitate greater mobile access to CLWR's services. |
||||||
|
. Currently offers VoIP telephony services in 13 markets, and plans to expand this offering to |
||||||
|
other markets in the future. |
||||||
|
. Also plans to offer other premium services and applications, which may include WiFi hotspots, |
||||||
|
public safety services, security services, and subscription-based technical support. |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes that its planned mobile WiMAX deployment will enable it to offer additional |
||||||
|
premium services that take advantage of the capabilities of this technology. |
||||||
|
Sprint Nextel competition |
||||||
|
Sprint Nextel, which CLWR believes is the largest holder of spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band in the |
||||||
|
United States, recently announced that it intends to deploy a mobile WiMAX network covering |
||||||
|
100 million people in the United States by the end of 2008. |
||||||
|
Intel joint development program |
||||||
|
. CLWR and Intel have agreed to jointly develop, promote and market a mobile WiMAX service |
||||||
|
offering as a co-branded service available only over Clearwire's mobile WiMAX network in the |
||||||
|
United States. |
||||||
|
. This service will target users of notebook computers, ultramobile PCs, and other mobile |
||||||
|
computing devices containing Intel microprocessors. |
||||||
|
Industry |
||||||
|
. In its November 2006 Worldwide WiMAX Forecast, Gartner Dataquest estimates that the size of |
||||||
|
the North American WiMAX market will increase from approximately 30,000 connection |
||||||
|
installed bases in 2006 to 21.2 million in 2011 |
||||||
|
. And the worldwide market will increase from 180,000 connection installed bases in 2006 to 84.8 |
||||||
|
million in 2011. |
||||||
|
. In addition to growing broadband demand, the rapid growth of mobile email products, as well as |
||||||
|
sales of notebook computers and ultramobile PCs, leads us to believe that subscribers will |
||||||
|
increasingly favor Internet access that provides for the portability offered by CLWR's existing |
||||||
|
network and, once commercially deployable, the mobility offered by WiMAX. |
||||||
|
Demand for mobile applications |
||||||
|
. As wireless broadband becomes more widely available, CLWR believes demand for mobile |
||||||
|
applications will dramatically increase, including demand for email, web browsing, VoIP |
||||||
|
telephony, streaming audio and video, video conferencing, gaming, e-commerce, music and video |
||||||
|
downloading and file transfers. |
||||||
|
. For instance, the U.S. VoIP-based broadband telephony market is expected to grow from 4.3 |
||||||
|
million households in 2005 to 22.5 million households by 2010, according to Jupiter Research's |
||||||
|
Broadband / Voice Over IP (September 2006) report, representing approximately a 39% |
||||||
|
compound annual growth rate. |
||||||
|
. The worldwide VoIP telephony market is expected to experience similar growth trends, |
||||||
|
according to iSuppli's August 2006 Wired Communications Topical Report. |
||||||
|
CLWR Competitive Strengths |
||||||
|
CLWR believes its business model is unique |
||||||
|
> Attractive Spectrum Position |
||||||
|
. The supply of licensed spectrum is limited, creating significant barriers to entry for competing |
||||||
|
wireless services. |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes that it has the second largest spectrum position in the 2.5 GHz (2495-2690 MHz) |
||||||
|
band in the United States with a spectrum portfolio that as of December 31, 2006 includes |
||||||
|
approximately 12.0 billion MHz-POPs, an industry metric that represents the amount of spectrum |
||||||
|
in a given area, measured in Megahertz, multiplied by the estimated population of that area. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, CLWR's spectrum rights in the United States covered an estimated |
||||||
|
214 million people. |
||||||
|
. CLWR is continuing to acquire additional spectrum in the United States. For instance, in |
||||||
|
February 2007, CLSR agreed to acquire all of the 2.5GHz spectrum held by AT&T. When |
||||||
|
completed, the acquisition will increase CLWR's spectrum holdings by 1.7 billion MHz-POPs in |
||||||
|
the southeastern United States. |
||||||
|
. In Europe, as of December 31, 2006, CLWR held 8.7 billion MHz-POPs of spectrum, |
||||||
|
predominantly in the 3.5 GHz band, covering approximately 199 million people. |
||||||
|
. CLWR plans to continue acquiring spectrum in markets that it believes are attractive for CLWR |
||||||
|
service offerings |
||||||
|
> Efficient Economic Model |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes its economic model is replicable and scalable in individual markets |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, 29 of CLWR's 34 markets in the United States had positive cash flow |
||||||
|
from operations before marketing expenses and four markets in the United States had positive cash |
||||||
|
flow from operations. |
||||||
|
> World-Class Management Team |
||||||
|
. Regarded as a pioneer and leader in the wireless communications industry, Mr. McCaw has been |
||||||
|
an active entrepreneur, operator and investor in the industry for more than 35 years. |
||||||
|
. In addition to Mr. McCaw, CLWR's senior management team consists of a core group of eight |
||||||
|
senior executives, who together average almost 23 years of experience in or serving the |
||||||
|
communications and technology industries with companies such as McCaw Cellular, AT&T |
||||||
|
Wireless, Nextel Communications, Nextel Partners, Intel and others. |
||||||
|
> Strong Strategic Relationships |
||||||
|
. Key strategic relationships with three industry leaders, Intel, Motorola and Bell Canada, which, |
||||||
|
directly or through their affiliates, have invested a total of approximately $1.1 billion in CLWR's |
||||||
|
equity securities. |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes its strategic relationships with Intel, Motorola and Bell Canada place CLWR in |
||||||
|
an advantageous position with respect to access to equipment, deployment of mobile WiMAX and |
||||||
|
development of other value added services, such as VoIP telephony |
||||||
|
Wireless broadband network |
||||||
|
. Based on proprietary non-line-of-sight, or NLOS, Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing, |
||||||
|
or OFDM, technologies. |
||||||
|
. CLWR is committed to deploy networks based on the IEEE mobile Worldwide Interoperability |
||||||
|
of Microwave Access 802.16e-2005, or mobile WiMAX, standard once mobile WiMAX |
||||||
|
equipment is commercially available and meets CLWR's requirements. |
||||||
|
. As with CLWR's current network infrastructure equipment, the company expects mobile |
||||||
|
WiMAX to support fixed, portable and mobile service offerings using a single network |
||||||
|
architecture. |
||||||
|
. In addition, because mobile WiMAX is a standards-based technology, CLWR expects |
||||||
|
manufacturers to eventually offer a number of handheld communications and consumer electronic |
||||||
|
devices that will be enabled to communicate using CLWR's mobile WiMAX network, including |
||||||
|
notebook computers, ultramobile personal computers, or PCs, personal data assistants, or PDAs, |
||||||
|
gaming consoles, MP3 players, and other handheld devices. |
||||||
|
Current services |
||||||
|
. Both competitive with and complementary to existing wireline and wireless networks. |
||||||
|
. Subscribers may access the same rich content, applications and services as subscribers of |
||||||
|
wireline broadband services, while also experiencing much of the freedom and flexibility that |
||||||
|
large scale wireless networks enable. |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes its network combines some of the best features of cellular, cable modem, digital |
||||||
|
subscriber line, or DSL, and wireless fidelity, or WiFi, networks into a single service offering that |
||||||
|
legacy networks do not currently match. |
||||||
|
. As CLWR's capabilities evolve, CLWR also expects to develop and offer additional innovative |
||||||
|
and differentiated products and services. |
||||||
|
. CLWR's recently introduced voice over Internet protocol, or VoIP, telephony service is one |
||||||
|
example of a service that complements the current wireless broadband offering |
||||||
|
History & coverage |
||||||
|
. Founded by telecommunications pioneer Craig O. McCaw, Chairman, in October 2003 |
||||||
|
. Launched our first market in August 2004. |
||||||
|
. By December 31, 2006, offered our services to more than 9.6 million people in the United States |
||||||
|
and Europe. |
||||||
|
. CLWR's network in the United States is deployed in 34 markets across more than 350 |
||||||
|
municipalities and covers an estimated 8.6 million people. |
||||||
|
. Markets range from major metropolitan areas to small, rural communities, and all sizes in |
||||||
|
between. |
||||||
|
. As of December 31, 2006, also offered our wireless broadband services in Brussels, Belgium and |
||||||
|
Dublin, Ireland, where CLWR's network covers approximately 1.0 million people. |
||||||
|
Subscribers |
||||||
|
. Have grown from 1,000 wireless broadband Internet subscribers as of September 30, 2004 to |
||||||
|
206,200 as of December 31, 2006. |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes that substantially all of the households it covers have access to cable modem |
||||||
|
and/or DSL Internet services |
||||||
|
. Leading CLWR to conclude that its rapid subscriber growth rates reflect mass market appeal and |
||||||
|
robust customer demand for CLWR's differentiated services, even in the presence of highly |
||||||
|
competitive wireline broadband alternatives. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Principal competitors include cable and DSL operators, wireless telephone providers, WiFi and, |
||||||
|
prospectively, WiMAX providers, satellite providers and others. |
||||||
|
> Cable Modem and DSL Services |
||||||
|
Principal competitors include cable companies, such as Time Warner and Comcast, as well as |
||||||
|
incumbent telephone companies, such as AT&T, Qwest and Verizon. |
||||||
|
> Cellular and PCS Services |
||||||
|
> Wireless Broadband Service Providers |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes that, as network infrastructure based on mobile WiMAX technology becomes |
||||||
|
commercially available and manufacturers develop and sell handheld communications and |
||||||
|
consumer electronic devices that are enabled to communicate using mobile WiMAX networks, |
||||||
|
other network operators will introduce mobile WiMAX services comparable to CLWR's in both |
||||||
|
domestic and international markets. |
||||||
|
. For instance, Sprint Nextel, which CLWR believes is the largest holder of spectrum in the 2.5 |
||||||
|
GHz band in the United States, recently announced that it intends to deploy a mobile WiMAX |
||||||
|
network covering 100 million people in the United States by the end of 2008. |
||||||
|
> Satellite |
||||||
|
. Satellite providers like Wild Blue and Hughes Network Services offer broadband data services |
||||||
|
that address a niche market, mainly less densely populated areas that are unserved or underserved |
||||||
|
by competing service providers. |
||||||
|
. Although satellite offers service to a large geographic area, latency caused by the time it takes for |
||||||
|
the signal to travel to and from the satellite may challenge the ability to provide some services, |
||||||
|
such as VoIP, and reduces the size of the addressable market |
||||||
|
> WISPs and WiFi |
||||||
|
Also competes with other wireless Internet service providers that use unlicensed spectrum. In |
||||||
|
addition to these commercial operators, many local governments, universities and other |
||||||
|
governmental or quasi-governmental entities are providing or subsidizing WiFi networks over |
||||||
|
unlicensed spectrum, in some cases at no cost to the user |
||||||
|
. CLWR relies exclusively on licensed spectrum for its network and does not expect significant |
||||||
|
competition from providers using unlicensed spectrum to deliver services to their customers. |
||||||
|
> Other |
||||||
|
. CLWR believes that other emerging technologies may also enter the broadband services market |
||||||
|
. For example, certain Internet service providers are working with electric distribution utilities to |
||||||
|
install broadband over power line, or BPL, technology on electric distribution lines to provide |
||||||
|
broadband services. |
||||||
|
. These Internet service and BPL providers are potential competitors. |
||||||
|
. BPL technology may turn electrical lines into large unshielded transmitting antennas that would |
||||||
|
allow transmission of data over these lines, but could potentially create interference with some |
||||||
|
wireless networks. |
||||||
|
Use of $445mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
Market and network expansion, spectrum acquisitions and general corporate purposes. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Xinhua Finance Media |
XFML, B-, 8 |
|||||
|
Chinese media company. |
Post-IPO ADS equivalents: 68mm |
|||||
|
Shanghai, China |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
||||
|
Rev ($mm) |
proforma ====> |
$62 |
Cap (mm) |
|||
|
Operating income % |
1% |
$888 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($2.2) |
@$13 |
||||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-4% |
|||||
|
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statements of operations for the year ended |
||||||
|
December 31, 2006 present adjustments as if the acquisitions had been consummated on January |
||||||
|
1, 2006., for proforma results see page 11 of the S-1 filed Feb 21, 2007 |
||||||
|
. XFML's consolidated financial statements are prepared and presented in accordance with United |
||||||
|
States generally accepted accounting principles |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Xinhua Finance (XFML) |
$888 |
14.3 |
-404 |
2.8 |
2.8 |
34% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
8 |
|
|
Compare & contrast-- with international advertising agencies |
||||||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
March 2 |
|
|
Xinhua Finance (XFML) |
$888 |
14.3 |
-404 |
2.8 |
2.8 |
|
|
Interpublic Grp (IPG) |
$5,450 |
0.9 |
-151 |
2.8 |
-5.5 |
$12.36 |
|
Omnicom Group (OMC) |
$17,480 |
1.5 |
20 |
4.5 |
-5.6 |
$103.78 |
|
Publicis Groupe SA (PUB) |
$8,290 |
1.5 |
14 |
n/a |
n/a |
$45.13 |
|
Note: valuation ratios for XFML are closest to IPG |
||||||
|
. Same price-to-book value of 2.8 |
||||||
|
. Looks like XFML mis-stated its price-to-tangible book value ratio |
||||||
|
. XFML's comparative price to sales ratios appears quite high |
||||||
|
Summary comments: |
||||||
|
. A China-based advertising agency with increasing critical mass, could become a leader in the |
||||||
|
business and financial media areas, focused on an affluent segment of China's market. |
||||||
|
. Right now most revenue (76%) is from advertising agency-related sources |
||||||
|
. On a combined basis XFML also generates and markets its own media content, although that |
||||||
|
division's revenue doesn't yet make a significant contribution |
||||||
|
. Strong, unique agreements to sell advertising space, some exclusively, see 'strategic |
||||||
|
partnerships' below |
||||||
|
. Consolidated financial statements present in accordance with United States generally accepted |
||||||
|
accounting principles (GAAP), which is a good sign for the investment community in the United |
||||||
|
States |
||||||
|
. Valuation ratios seem high |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
. Established on November 7, 2005 by the parent, Xinhua Finance Limited. Acquired companies |
||||||
|
to build an integrated platform of media products and services |
||||||
|
. Outlets reach an estimated 210 million potential television viewers, a potential listening audience |
||||||
|
of 33 million people, and the readers of leading magazines and newspapers. |
||||||
|
2006 Sources of Revenue |
||||||
|
And % of revenues for 2006) plus cost of revenues (% of revenues) |
||||||
|
o advertising services, 76.1%--47% |
||||||
|
o advertising sales, 11.3%--3.2% |
||||||
|
o content production, 11.1%--4.8% |
||||||
|
o publishing services, 1.5%--2.4% |
||||||
|
Five operating groups |
||||||
|
o Advertising |
||||||
|
which refers to XFML's advertising agency that creates and places advertising for television, print |
||||||
|
media and campus billboards; |
||||||
|
o Media production |
||||||
|
which refers to the in-house production studios that create and produce a diverse array of high |
||||||
|
quality programs, including business, entertainment, educational and animation shows; |
||||||
|
o Broadcasting |
||||||
|
which refers to the distribution of programming through Inner Mongolia Satellite Television; |
||||||
|
production and syndication of the Fortune China series of financial programs, including Fortune |
||||||
|
Morning 7 a.m., a popular financial news programs in China; and the production and distribution |
||||||
|
of bilingual content for China Radio International's EasyFM stations in Beijing and Shanghai; |
||||||
|
o Print |
||||||
|
which refers to XFML's exclusive rights to sell advertising for and provide management and |
||||||
|
information consulting services to, Money Journal magazine and the Economic Observer |
||||||
|
newspaper; |
||||||
|
o Research |
||||||
|
which refers to XFML's market research group that provides research services on products, |
||||||
|
advertisements and markets. |
||||||
|
The biggest component is advertising services, 76% of revenues |
||||||
|
XFML generates advertising services in several way |
||||||
|
o Acts as an advertising agent to place advertisements on certain programs aired by Beijing |
||||||
|
Television Station and other television stations, on billboards on some university campuses in |
||||||
|
Shanghai and in certain print and electronic media (by the advertising group); |
||||||
|
o Designs and produces television, print and billboard advertisements (by the advertising group); |
||||||
|
o Markets services, primarily events organization (by the print group, the broadcasting group and |
||||||
|
the advertising group); |
||||||
|
o Research services (by the research group); and |
||||||
|
o Advertising, sponsorship and sponsored programming on Inner Mongolia Satellite Television |
||||||
|
and provision of content and advisory services to Shanghai Camera (by the broadcasting group). |
||||||
|
Strategic partnerships |
||||||
|
> Some of these key contracts have long terms, while others have short terms ranging from one |
||||||
|
year to a few years and will need renewal. The longer term contracts, which all expire in 2014 or |
||||||
|
later, or have no expiration, include, but are not limited to, the following: |
||||||
|
o agreements to provide consulting and advisory services to, offer content to, and be the exclusive |
||||||
|
external advertising agent for, Shanghai Camera Media Investment Co., Ltd., or Shanghai Camera, |
||||||
|
which has the exclusive rights to sell advertising for and provides most of the content of Inner |
||||||
|
Mongolia Satellite Television; |
||||||
|
o agreements with Economic Observer Press Office that allow us to have the exclusive rights to |
||||||
|
sell advertising for the Economic Observer and to provide management and information |
||||||
|
consulting services; |
||||||
|
o agreement with the exclusive advertising agent for China Radio International that allow us to |
||||||
|
have the exclusive rights to sell advertising for and the right to provide content to its EasyFM |
||||||
|
stations in Beijing and Shanghai. We intend to only provide non-news content pursuant to this |
||||||
|
agreement; and |
||||||
|
o agreement with Money Journal Press Office that allows us to have the exclusive rights to sell |
||||||
|
advertising for, and to provide management and information consulting services to, Money |
||||||
|
Journal. |
||||||
|
> Shorter term contracts, which expire in 2009 or earlier, include, but are not limited to, the |
||||||
|
following: |
||||||
|
o agreement with Hunan Television Station that allows us to broadcast Fortune Morning 7 a.m. on |
||||||
|
Hunan Satellite Television; |
||||||
|
o agreement with Dow Jones that allows Money Journal to publish Dow Jones content; and |
||||||
|
o agreement with Beijing Television Station's advertising agents that allow us to act as advertising |
||||||
|
agent for certain programs. |
||||||
|
> XFML's business relies on certain key contracts to which it is not a party. Instead, XFML has |
||||||
|
contracts with the companies that in turn have those key contracts with third parties. The contracts |
||||||
|
XFML has allow XFML to benefit financially and strategically from its contracting |
||||||
|
counterparties' roles in the following key contracts: |
||||||
|
o contracts with Shanghai Camera, which has the exclusive rights to sell advertising for and |
||||||
|
provides most of the content of Inner Mongolia Satellite Television under a contract it has with |
||||||
|
Inner Mongolia Television Station; |
||||||
|
o contracts with Beijing Guoguang Guangrong Advertising Co., Ltd., or Guoguang Guangrong, |
||||||
|
the exclusive advertising agent for China Radio International's domestic stations, giving XFML |
||||||
|
the exclusive rights to sell advertising for and the rights to provide content to the EasyFM radio |
||||||
|
stations in Beijing and Shanghai; and |
||||||
|
o contracts with Beijing Television Station's advertising agents that allow XFML to act as |
||||||
|
advertising agent for certain television programs. |
||||||
|
Growth by acquisition |
||||||
|
Acquired companies include EconWorld Media (the predecessor), Beijing Century Media, Xinhua |
||||||
|
Finance Advertising Limited (formerly known as Ming Shing International Limited, or Ming |
||||||
|
Shing), Accord Group Investments Limited, Beijing Perspective Orient Movie and Television |
||||||
|
Intermediary Co., Ltd., and Shanghai Hyperlink Research Co., Ltd., or Hyperlink |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
Each of XFML's businesses is subject to significant competition, much of it from state-owned |
||||||
|
competitors. XFML believes it can distinguish itself from competitors by being the only company |
||||||
|
that can provide a full range of production services, including animation, broadcast design and |
||||||
|
post-production for television commercials, while having a partnership with a research group and |
||||||
|
distribution channels through various types of media outlets. |
||||||
|
> Media production |
||||||
|
Competes against a strong field of competitors in media production, including large state-owned |
||||||
|
production companies. There are approximately 1,160 licensed television production companies in |
||||||
|
China and approximately 700 companies producing drama series. |
||||||
|
> Broadcasting |
||||||
|
. XFML and its strategic partners face many competitors in the Chinese broadcast market. Within |
||||||
|
each province or city, there are up to 16 China Central Television satellite channels and up to 30 |
||||||
|
regional satellite channels, which compete with Inner Mongolia Satellite Television. There may |
||||||
|
also be local cable channels and local terrestrial channels. |
||||||
|
. The major competitors of XFML's Fortune China operations are China Central Television |
||||||
|
Channel 2, a satellite television channel covering many cities throughout China, and Fortune One, |
||||||
|
a financial news program broadcast primarily in Shanghai. |
||||||
|
. The radio markets in Beijing and Shanghai are very competitive. EasyFM has only a small share |
||||||
|
of the Beijing and Shanghai radio markets, respectively. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
. The Economic Observer, a weekly newspaper, faces competition from several financial |
||||||
|
newspapers in China, including 21st Century, which prints three times a week, CBN, which prints |
||||||
|
daily and China Business. |
||||||
|
. Money Journal competes against several financial magazines, both international and domestic, |
||||||
|
such as Caijing Magazine, Harvard Business Review, and the Chinese versions of Business Week, |
||||||
|
Fortune and Forbes. |
||||||
|
> Advertising |
||||||
|
. Primary competition in advertising comes from the American Association of Advertising |
||||||
|
Agencies, or 4A, advertising companies, which are the dominant international advertising |
||||||
|
companies. |
||||||
|
. Although XFML has relationships with them in which they act as advertising agents, at the same |
||||||
|
time the 4A companies have much of the market share both globally and in China and are |
||||||
|
XFML's competitors. |
||||||
|
> Research |
||||||
|
. There are approximately 2,000 research companies in China, but many of these are capable only |
||||||
|
of data gathering. |
||||||
|
. International firms also make up a large portion of the research market in China. |
||||||
|
Shareholders |
||||||
|
Upon completion of this offering, will be 36.7% owned by the parent, Xinhua Finance Limited, |
||||||
|
8.0% owned by Patriarch Partners Media Holdings, LLC, and 5.8% owned by Fredy Bush, Chief |
||||||
|
Executive Officer and the Chairman of our Board |
||||||
|
About the parent, Xinhua Finance Limited |
||||||
|
Employed: 588 end of 2005 |
||||||
|
Xinhua Finance webcast |
||||||
|
http://www.xinhuafinance.com/en/for-investors/ |
||||||
|
click, then go to 'ceo webcast' in upper right |
||||||
|
. SHANGHAI, February 15, 2007 - Xinhua Finance (TSE Mothers: 9399 and OTC: XHFNY), |
||||||
|
China's premier financial information and media service provider, today announced, under |
||||||
|
International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"), consolidated revenue of US$175.0 million |
||||||
|
and net income of US$18.7 million, which represented gains of 59% and 82% respectively over |
||||||
|
those of the last fiscal year |
||||||
|
. Xinhua Finance Limited. The Group's principal activity is the provision of China-specific |
||||||
|
indices, financial news feeds, credit ratings, investor relations services, financial publishing in |
||||||
|
books and magazines and television consulting and distribution. Its operating in three segments: |
||||||
|
Provision of News and Financial information, Provision of Service and Solutions and Provision of |
||||||
|
Financial Media. The Group acquire 60% of the equity interest in EconWorld Media Limited in |
||||||
|
May-2005, Taylor Rafferty Associates Inc and 60% of the equity interest in Shanghai Pobo Data |
||||||
|
and Information Network Consulting Co Limited in Jun-2005, Washington Analysis Corporation |
||||||
|
in Jul-2005, Beijing Century Media Culture Co Limited (Century Media) in Sep-2005 and 50% of |
||||||
|
the equity interest in Shanghai Far East Credit Rating Co Limited in Nov-2005. |
||||||
|
Use of $204mm in IPO proceeds from sale of 17mmm ADSs |
||||||
|
(shareholders intend to sell 5.8mm ADSs) |
||||||
|
o $50 million to repay parent and Xinhua Financial Network Limited. |
||||||
|
o an undetermined amount for strategic acquisitions of complementary businesses. At this time has |
||||||
|
not entered into advanced discussions or negotiations regarding potential acquisitions except for |
||||||
|
the acquisition of the remaining equity of Beijing Perspective; |
||||||
|
o balance to fund working capital and for other general corporate purposes. |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||
|
Sourcefire (FIRE) |
FIRE, C+, 7 |
|||||
|
computer network security |
Post-IPO shrs: 23mm |
|||||
|
Columbia, Maryland |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
IPO Mkt |
|
|
Rev ($mm) |
$10 |
$17 |
$33 |
$45 |
Cap (mm) |
|
|
Gross Profit % |
68% |
68% |
75% |
70% |
$300 |
|
|
SG&A |
95% |
75% |
52% |
46% |
@$13 |
|
|
Profit (loss) ($mm) |
($8.9) |
($10.5) |
($5.5) |
($0.9) |
||
|
Profit (loss) % |
-94% |
-63% |
-17% |
-2% |
||
|
Capital expenditures |
$80 |
$80 |
$138 |
$152 |
||
|
VALUATION RATIOS |
IPO Mrkt |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
Price / |
% offered |
|
Cap (mm) |
Sales |
Earnings |
BookValue |
TangibleBV |
in IPO |
|
|
Sourcefire |
$300 |
6.7 |
-334 |
3.3 |
3.4 |
25% |
|
SCORECARD |
Mgt |
Market |
Market Do- |
Proprie- |
Total |
|
|
1-5, 5 is high |
Growth |
mination |
tary |
rating |
||
|
20 is perfect |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
7 |
|
|
Summary |
||||||
|
Based on top line revenue trends and decreasing losses, breakeven is in sight |
||||||
|
Business |
||||||
|
Intrusion prevention, vulnerability management and unified threat management, |
||||||
|
. A leading provider of intelligence driven, open source network security solutions that enables customers |
||||||
|
to protect their computer networks in an effective, efficient and highly automated manner. |
||||||
|
. Sells security solutions to a diverse customer base that includes more than 25 of the Fortune 100 |
||||||
|
companies and over half of the 30 largest U.S. government agencies. |
||||||
|
. Also manages one of the security industry's leading open source initiatives, Snort. |
||||||
|
. For the year ended December 31, 2006, generated 81% of revenue from customers in the U.S. and 19% |
||||||
|
from international customers |
||||||
|
. In 2006, FIRE closed its fourth round of institutional financing, raising $23 million from the sale of Series |
||||||
|
D convertible preferred stock, and achieved the first quarter of cash flow positive results. |
||||||
|
Highly seasonal revenue |
||||||
|
. Revenue from product sales has been highly seasonal, with more than one-third of total product |
||||||
|
revenue in recent fiscal years generated in the fourth quarter. |
||||||
|
. The timing of year-end shipments could materially affect fourth quarter product revenue in any fiscal year |
||||||
|
and sequential quarterly comparisons. |
||||||
|
. Revenue from government customers has occasionally been influenced by the September 30th fiscal year |
||||||
|
end of the U.S. federal government, which has historically resulted in our revenue from government |
||||||
|
customers being highest in the third quarter. |
||||||
|
The Industry |
||||||
|
. FIRE believes, based on a review of various industry sources, that the network security industry was |
||||||
|
estimated to be a $18.4 billion market in 2006 and is projected to grow to $26.9 billion in 2009, |
||||||
|
representing a compound annual growth rate of over 13%. |
||||||
|
. Addressable markets include intrusion prevention, vulnerability management and unified threat |
||||||
|
management, which were collectively projected to total $2.9 billion in 2006 and are expected to grow at a |
||||||
|
compound annual growth rate in excess of 21% to $5.2 billion in 2009, according to industry sources we |
||||||
|
reviewed. |
||||||
|
Products |
||||||
|
. Family of network security products forms a comprehensive Discover, Determine and Defend, or 3D, |
||||||
|
approach to network security. Using this approach, FIRE's technology can automatically: |
||||||
|
o Discover potential threats and points of vulnerability; |
||||||
|
o Determine the potential impact of those observations to the network; and |
||||||
|
o Defend the network through proactive enforcement of security policy. |
||||||
|
Sourcefire's 3D approach is comprised of three key components: |
||||||
|
> RNA. At the heart of the Sourcefire 3D security solution is Real-time Network Awareness, or RNA, a |
||||||
|
network intelligence product that provides persistent visibility into the composition, behavior, topology (the |
||||||
|
relationship of network components) and risk profile of the network |
||||||
|
> Intrusion Sensors. The Intrusion Sensors utilize open source Snort® and proprietary technology to |
||||||
|
monitor network traffic. |
||||||
|
> Defense Center. The Defense Center aggregates, correlates and prioritizes network security events from |
||||||
|
RNA Sensors and Intrusion Sensors to synthesize multipoint event correlation and policy compliance |
||||||
|
analysis |
||||||
|
Snort |
||||||
|
. The traffic inspection engine used in FIRE's intrusion prevention products is the open source technology |
||||||
|
called Snort. Martin Roesch, the founder and Chief Technology Officer, created Snort in 1998. |
||||||
|
. FIRE employees, including Mr. Roesch, have authored all major components of Snort, and FIRE |
||||||
|
maintains control over the Snort project, including the principal Snort community forum, Snort.org. Snort, |
||||||
|
which has become a de facto industry standard, has been downloaded over 3 million times. |
||||||
|
. FIRE believes that a majority of the Fortune 100 companies and all of the 30 largest U.S. government |
||||||
|
agencies use Snort technology to monitor network traffic and that Snort is the most widely deployed |
||||||
|
intrusion prevention technology worldwide. |
||||||
|
. The ubiquitous nature of the Snort user community represents a significant opportunity for FIRE to sell |
||||||
|
proprietary products to customers that require a complete enterprise solution. |
||||||
|
Broad Industry Recognition. |
||||||
|
. FIRE has received numerous industry awards and certifications, including recognition by Gartner, Inc. as |
||||||
|
a "leader" in the network intrusion prevention systems market, supporting FIRE's position as one of a |
||||||
|
select few companies that best combines "completeness of vision" with "ability to execute." |
||||||
|
. RNA is one of only five network security products to receive the NSS Gold award, which is awarded by |
||||||
|
The NSS Group only to those products that are distinguished in terms of advanced or unique features, and |
||||||
|
which offer outstanding value. |
||||||
|
Competition |
||||||
|
o Large companies, including Symantec Corporation, Cisco Systems, Inc., Internet Security Systems, Inc. |
||||||
|
(which has recently been acquired by IBM), Juniper Networks, Inc., 3Com Corporation, Check Point |
||||||
|
Software Technologies, LTD and McAfee, Inc., that sell competitive products and offerings, as well as |
||||||
|
other large software companies that have the technical capability and resources to develop competitive |
||||||
|
products; |
||||||
|
o Software or hardware network infrastructure companies, including Cisco Systems, Inc., 3Com |
||||||
|
Corporation and Juniper Networks, Inc., that could integrate features that are similar to FIRE's products |
||||||
|
into their own products; |
||||||
|
. Mergers or consolidations among these competitors, or acquisitions of competitors by large companies, |
||||||
|
present competitive challenges to the business. |
||||||
|
. For example, Symantec Corporation, Cisco Systems, Inc., McAfee, Inc., 3Com Corporation and Juniper |
||||||
|
Networks, Inc. have acquired during the past several years smaller companies, which have intrusion |
||||||
|
detection or prevention technologies and Internet Security Systems, Inc. has recently been acquired by |
||||||
|
IBM. |
||||||
|
Shareholders |
||||||
|
Post-IPO will be about 50% owned by venture capital firms, including Sierra Ventures, New Enterprise |
||||||
|
Associates, Inflection Point, Core Capital Partners and Sequoia Capital |
||||||
|
Check Point Software merger not completed |
||||||
|
. In October 2005 entered into a definitive merger agreement to be acquired by Check Point Software |
||||||
|
Technologies Ltd., an Israeli company, for $225.0 million. |
||||||
|
. As a result of the merger announcement and during the period following the announcement, FIRE's U.S. |
||||||
|
government business was curtailed as certain government agencies apparently became unwilling to buy |
||||||
|
products from a company being acquired by a foreign entity and instead purchased and installed products |
||||||
|
sold by our competitors. |
||||||
|
. In April 2006, the proposed acquisition was mutually terminated in response to objections from the |
||||||
|
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. |
||||||
|
. FIRE's business, including business with the U.S. government, continued to grow following the |
||||||
|
termination. |
||||||
|
Use of $72mm in IPO proceeds |
||||||
|
Working capital and other general corporate purposes, including financing growth, developing new |
||||||
|
products and funding capital expenditures |
||||||
|
=================== |
||||||