Back to GetFilings.com

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.

or

For the transition period from                      to                     .

Commission File Number 000-50770

Leadis Technology, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(408) 331-8600

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, $0.001 par value

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such requirements for the past 90 days.    YES  þ    NO  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).    YES  ¨    NO  þ

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant based upon the closing sale price of the common stock on June 30, 2004, the last day of registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, as reported on The NASDAQ National Market was approximately $133,092,694. Shares of common stock held by each executive officer and director and by each person who is known to the registrant to own 5% or more of the outstanding common stock have been excluded from this calculation in that such persons may be deemed affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

At February 28, 2005, the registrant had 28,150,277 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Parts of the Proxy Statement for the registrant’s 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 24, 2005 are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

LEADIS TECHNOLOGY, INC.

Form 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

Table of Contents

PART I

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, and particularly the sections entitled “Business,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and “Risk Factors,” contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which are subject to the “safe harbor” created by those sections. These statements relate to future events or our future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our financial performance or achievements to differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements can often be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “continue,” “plan,” “intend,” “potential,” “project” or other similar words. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or publicly revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document.

Overview

We design, develop and market mixed-signal semiconductors that enable and enhance the features and capabilities of small panel displays. Our core products are color display drivers with integrated controllers, which are critical components of displays used in mobile consumer electronics devices. We primarily focus on the mobile handset market, but some of our products are suitable for use in other consumer electronic devices. We were incorporated in Delaware on May 15, 2000, and began commercially shipping products in the third quarter of 2002. During 2004, we shipped 56 million units of our products and recorded revenue of $150.3 million.

We sell our products directly to display module manufacturers, which incorporate our drivers into their display module subassemblies for leading mobile handset manufacturers. Our drivers are currently used by three of the top five global mobile handset manufacturers, namely LG Electronics Inc., Nokia Corporation and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. We focus on the design, development and marketing of our products and outsource all of the fabrication, assembly and testing of our products. We believe this concentrated focus enables us to provide our customers with critical time-to-market and product differentiation advantages. Our goal is to be a leading supplier of display drivers for all small panel display technologies, including thin film transistor liquid crystal displays, or TFT LCDs, color super twisted nematic liquid crystal displays, or CSTN LCDs, and color organic light-emitting diodes, or OLED.

Our principal executive offices are located in Sunnyvale, California. Our website address is leadis.com.

Industry Overview

Consumers throughout the world are rapidly adopting mobile consumer electronics devices such as mobile handsets, personal digital assistants, MP3 players, mobile gaming devices and digital cameras. As mobile device manufacturers introduce new products with innovative technologies and applications, the display becomes an increasingly important feature of the device. Use of color displays has become the norm in the major global markets for many mobile consumer electronics devices, including mobile handsets.

Color displays for consumer electronic devices are differentiated by size, resolution, number of colors, brightness, color sharpness, contrast and response time. However, mobile device manufacturers need to balance display performance with cost, reliability and power consumption. The balance that the manufacturer strikes among these factors often determines the type of display that is optimal for a given device. Every mobile device display needs a display driver to function. While advances in materials used to manufacture displays have played an important role in display innovation, display drivers are the critical semiconductor component that enable display functionality. The performance characteristics of a display driver are critical to the quality and visual

3

Table of Contents

appeal of the images and text generated on the display and the power efficiency of the mobile device. Materials used to manufacture displays cannot achieve their full potential without continued advancements in display driver technology.

CSTN LCDs and TFT LCDs have become the dominant color display technologies for mobile handsets. While CSTN is used for mid- to low-end mobile handsets because of its cost advantage, adoption of TFT is gaining momentum for mid- to high-end mobile handsets based on better image quality, larger size and higher resolution. As newer applications demand better and larger displays, the number of mobile handsets with TFT displays is increasing. OLED technology has penetrated the market as a niche player with its excellent display quality for the last two years. However, the penetration rate for OLED has slowed significantly in recent periods due to its relatively higher cost.

Product Solution

We offer highly-integrated, single-chip mixed-signal display drivers targeting small panel displays based on all major display technologies, including the following:

STN technology—Super twisted nematic liquid crystal displays, or STN LCDs, is a widely used technology for small panel displays, particularly for displays used in mobile handsets. We design and market both color STN, or CSTN, display drivers, which are used primarily for mainstream mobile handsets, and monochrome STN display drivers, which were the dominant displays for wireless handsets until the introduction of color displays and are currently used mainly in low-end mobile handsets. We shipped our first CSTN driver in the third quarter of 2002, and currently offer four different CSTN products. In 2004, we began shipping a monochrome STN product, targeting the lower end of the mobile handset market. Recently, there has been a shift in the wireless handset market from 4K CSTN products to the next generation of 65K CSTN products, which enable greater color depths and richer display images. We expect a significant portion of our future revenue to be generated from sales of CSTN products, particularly our 65K CSTN products.

TFT technology—Thin film transistor liquid crystal displays, or TFT LCDs, have been widely used for large panel LCD applications such as notebook PCs, flat panel monitors and televisions. Application of TFT LCDs for mobile devices is relatively new and such displays are used primarily for mid- to high-end mobile devices. We design, develop and market drivers utilizing both amorphous TFT technology, which are used primarily in mobile handsets, and low-temperature polysilicon TFT, or LTPS TFT technology, which is currently used in digital still cameras and high-end mobile devices. In the fourth quarter of 2004, we announced the availability of two amorphous TFT products and two LTPS TFT products for sampling. We expect to begin volume production of TFT drivers in the first half of 2005, and we expect that a significant portion of our future revenue will be generated from sales of TFT products.

OLED technology—Organic light-emitting diode, or OLED, is a relatively new display technology that offers enhanced visual experience and performance characteristics as compared to alternative technologies, such as LCD. We were the first company to commercialize single-chip display drivers for full color OLED when we began shipping our first OLED driver in the third quarter of 2002. We currently offer six different passive matrix organic light-emitting diode, or PM-OLED, display drivers. While demand for OLED drivers in the mobile handset market has decreased recently, other applications for OLED displays, such as MP3 players, have emerged. We expect sales of OLED products to remain an important part of our business in the immediate future.

We are also developing, or plan to develop, drivers for other display technologies, including, active matrix OLED displays, or AM-OLED, which are expected to be an attractive display solution for mobile devices due to its excellent picture quality, lower power consumption and longer lifetime compared to PM-OLED.

As of March 1, 2005, we had ten different display drivers in volume production and six additional products available for sampling. We continue to seek development of additional products to address other segments of the

4

Table of Contents

display market, and will continue to introduce newer versions of our existing products. With our current and anticipated product portfolio, we believe we will be in position to address the current technology requirements of all major small panel display module manufacturers. The following table sets forth products in volume production or available for sampling.

Product Strategy

Our objective is to be the leading provider of small panel display driver technologies by using our advanced design engineering expertise, technology leadership, manufacturing process expertise, strong relationships with top tier handset manufacturers and library of functional building blocks. The principal elements of our strategy are to:

5

Table of Contents

Sales and Marketing

Our direct customers are display module manufacturers, who in turn sell their display modules to mobile handset manufacturers. We focus our sales and marketing strategy on establishing business and technology relationships with both major display module manufacturers and mobile handset manufacturers to be able to work closely with them on future driver solutions that align with their product roadmaps. Our design engineers collaborate with display module design engineers to create display drivers that comply with the specifications of the mobile handset manufacturers and provide a high level of performance at competitive prices. Our end market is highly concentrated among a few significant mobile handset manufacturers. As a result, our focused customer approach has enabled us to grow rapidly without incurring major sales and marketing expenses.

We market and sell our products through our direct sales force and marketing teams located in the United States, Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan, as well as through independent distributors in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. We anticipate having independent representatives and distributors in Japan and Korea in the future. We also utilize application engineers to provide technical support and assistance to potential and existing customers in designing, testing and qualifying display modules that incorporate our products.

6

Table of Contents

Customers

In 2004, Philips MDS and Samsung SDI Co. accounted for 52.3% and 36.7% of our revenue, respectively. We expect these two major display module manufacturers to account for a substantial portion of our revenue in the near future. As a result, the loss of or significant reduction in orders from either of these customers could significantly reduce our revenue and adversely impact our operating results. These mobile display module manufacturers supply modules incorporating our drivers to LG Electronics Inc., Nokia Corporation and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. We have recently started shipping products to other display module manufacturers, which in turn are selling display modules to other major and emerging mobile handset manufacturers. Please refer to Note 9 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this annual report for additional information regarding revenue by geographic region.

Seasonality

Our industry is focused on the mobile consumer electronic products market. Due to the seasonality in this market, we typically expect to see stronger revenue growth in the second half of the calendar year than in the first half of the year. In addition to the seasonality, the mobile handset market is also characterized by intense competition among a concentrated group of manufacturers, rapidly evolving technology and changing consumer preferences. These factors result in the frequent introduction of new products, short product life cycles, continually evolving mobile handset specifications and significant price competition. In addition, in the past, mobile handset manufacturers have inaccurately forecast consumer demand, which has led to significant changes in orders to their component suppliers. We have experienced both increases and decreases to orders within the same quarter and with limited advance notice. We expect such increases and decreases to continue to occur in the future.

Manufacturing

We outsource the manufacturing, assembly and testing of our products to third parties. Our foundry suppliers fabricate our products using a customized, high-voltage version of their mature and stable CMOS process technology with feature sizes of 0.25 micron and higher. Our principal foundry suppliers are Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing in Singapore, Silterra Malaysia Sdn.Bhd. in Malaysia and United Microelectronics Corporation in Taiwan. We also plan to use other foundry suppliers. Our fabless manufacturing model significantly reduces our capital requirements and allows us to focus our resources on the design, development and marketing of our products. In addition, we benefit from our suppliers’ manufacturing expertise, and from the flexibility to select those vendors that we believe offer the best capability and value. Our foundry suppliers use raw materials in the manufacture of silicon wafers used to fabricate our products. To the extent our foundry suppliers experience shortages of these raw materials or have poor yield rates, we may be unable to meet our customers’ demand requirements.

Following wafer fabrication processing, our wafers are shipped from the foundries to assembly and testing contractors, where they are electrically tested and assembled onto tape carrier packages for certain devices. We develop and control all product test programs used by our subcontractors. These test programs are developed based on product specifications, thereby maintaining our control over the performance of our devices. We currently rely primarily on Chipbond Technology Corporation, International Semiconductor Technology Ltd. and King Yuan Electronics Co., Ltd., each located in Taiwan, to assemble and test our products. Our assembly and test contractors use semiconductor packaging in the assembly and test of our products. To the extent these contractors are unable to secure sufficient quantities of this packaging, we may be unable to meet our customers’ product demand requirements. While our testing contractors currently ship our products directly to our customers, we may in the future ship products to customers out of our own facility.

Inventory

We manage inventories by forecasting demand on a product-by-product basis based upon our industry experience and communications with our customers. We place manufacturing orders for our products that are

7

Table of Contents

based on this forecasted demand. The quantity of products actually purchased by our customers as well as shipment schedules are subject to revisions that reflect changes in both the customers’ requirements and in manufacturing availability. Depending upon the level of demand for our products and demand for products incorporating our display drivers, we may maintain substantial inventories of our products in order to be able to meet demand on a timely basis.

Research and Development

We conduct our semiconductor design and development activities primarily in Korea. This allows us to access a pool of experienced display driver engineers and maintain geographic proximity to our customers while helping us to lower our operating costs. We believe that our continued commitment to research and development and timely introduction of new and enhanced display drivers is integral to maintaining our competitive position. As a result, we expect to continue to allocate significant resources to these efforts. Our total expenditures for research and development were $13.2 million for 2004, $6.5 million for 2003 and $1.4 million for 2002.

Intellectual Property

Our success and future growth will depend on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We rely primarily on patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret laws, contractual provisions, and licenses to protect our intellectual property. We also attempt to protect our trade secrets and proprietary information through agreements with our customers, suppliers, employees and consultants.

As of December 31, 2004, we had seven U.S. patent applications pending and had been issued one patent in Korea. These patent applications and issued patent cover our CSTN driving scheme, OLED screen performance and OLED power reduction. We expect to file additional patent applications covering our intellectual property. We cannot assure you that any patents will be issued to us as a result of our pending or future applications or that any patent issued will provide substantive protection for the technology or product covered by it.

While we intend to protect our intellectual property rights vigorously, we cannot assure you that these efforts will be successful. Despite our precautions, a third party may copy or otherwise obtain and use our products, technology or processes without authorization, or may independently develop similar technology. In addition, effective copyright, trademark and trade secret protection may be unavailable or limited in certain foreign jurisdictions. We cannot assure you that the measures we have implemented to prevent misappropriation or infringement of our intellectual property will be successful.

Competition

The markets for semiconductors generally, and small flat panel display drivers in particular, are intensely competitive. We believe that the principal competitive factors in our markets include design times, cost, display performance, level of integration, design customization, manufacturing expertise and quality.

We believe our solutions compete favorably against our competitors across these factors. We believe that we can typically design and prepare for the production of a display driver faster than our competitors based upon our broad library of proprietary functional building blocks. We believe our products enable a high level of display performance, creating a high-impact visual experience. We design our products to be highly integrated and power efficient. In addition, we work with mobile device manufacturers and their display suppliers to understand their needs and product roadmaps. We design our products to meet stringent functional and quality requirements and to be easily integrated into our customers’ products.

Many mobile device display module manufacturers are affiliated with vertically integrated electronics companies. Some of these companies also have semiconductor design and manufacturing resources for developing display drivers. We typically compete with these captive semiconductor suppliers as well as independent semiconductor suppliers. Captive semiconductor suppliers with which we may compete include

8

Table of Contents

Philips Semiconductor (a division of Philips Electronics, N.V.), Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Seiko Epson Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corporation and Toshiba Corporation. The major independent semiconductor suppliers with which we may compete include NEC Corporation, Novatek Microelectronics Corp., Ltd., Renesas Technology Corp., and Solomon Systech Limited. Many of our current and potential competitors have longer operating histories, greater name recognition, complementary product offerings, and significantly greater financial, sales and marketing, manufacturing, distribution, technical and other resources than us.

Employees

As of December 31, 2004, we had 89 employees, including 50 in research and development, 16 in sales and marketing, 8 in operations, and 15 in general and administrative functions. By region, 12 of our employees were located in the United States, 65 in Korea, 9 in Taiwan, and 3 in Hong Kong. None of our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We believe we have good relations with our employees.

Financial Information by Geographic Location

We operate in a single industry segment: the design, development and marketing of mixed-signal semiconductors that enable and enhance the features and capabilities of small panel displays for mobile consumer electronic products, primarily mobile handsets. We currently generate all of our revenue from customers in Asia. The information included in Note 9 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements is hereby incorporated by reference.

Executive Officers of the Registrant

Certain information regarding each of our executive officers as of March 15, 2005 is set forth below:

Sung Tae (“Steve”) Ahn founded Leadis in May 2000 and has been our President, Chief Executive Officer and a member of our board of directors since our formation. From 1992 until founding Leadis, Dr. Ahn held several positions at Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., a major electronics company, including General Manager of the LCD driver business, Director of the non-volatile memory division and Senior Manager of the process technology team. From 1989 to 1992, Dr. Ahn was a research engineer at Sharp Corporation, a major electronics company. From 1988 to 1989, Dr. Ahn was a member of the research staff at National Semiconductor Inc., a semiconductor manufacturer. Dr. Ahn holds a B.S. in Metallurgical Engineering from Seoul National University, an M.S. in Materials Science from Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, and an M.S. in Electrical Engineering and a Ph.D. in Materials Science and Engineering from Stanford University.

Victor Lee joined Leadis in December 2002 as our Chief Financial Officer and Secretary. From February 2001 until December 2002, Mr. Lee was engaged as an independent consultant. From December 1999 to January 2001, Mr. Lee served as the Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of SINA Corporation, an Internet portal network company. From September 1998 to August 1999, Mr. Lee was the Vice President and Acting Chief Financial Officer of VLSI Technology, Inc., a semiconductor manufacturer, and was the Vice President, Corporate Controller of VLSI Technology from 1997 to 1998. From 1989 to 1997, Mr. Lee was a finance director at Advanced Micro Devices Inc., a semiconductor manufacturer. Mr. Lee holds a B.S. in Industrial Engineering and Operations Research and an M.B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley.

9

Table of Contents

Keunmyung (“Ken”) Lee joined Leadis in August 2000 as our Chief Technology Officer and Vice President, has been a member of our board of directors since August 2002 and has been our Executive Vice President since January 2004. From 1985 until joining Leadis, Dr. Lee held various positions at Hewlett-Packard Company, a technology, personal computing and service company, including principal project engineer and manager. From 1994 through 1999, Dr. Lee served on the technical committee of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Conference on Electrical Performance of Electronics Packages. Dr. Lee holds a B.S. in Electronics Engineering from Seoul National University, and an M.S. and a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the University of California, Berkeley.

Daniel Hauck joined Leadis in January 2004 as our Vice President of Worldwide Sales. Prior to joining Leadis, Mr. Hauck was both President and Vice President of Worldwide Sales of Amphion Semiconductor, Ltd., a semiconductor company, from February 2002 to January 2004. From August 2000 to January 2002, Mr. Hauck served as Vice President of Worldwide Sales at BOPS, Inc., a semiconductor intellectual property company. From February 1998 to July 2000, Mr. Hauck served as Vice President, Worldwide Sales of NeoMagic Corporation, an applications processors company. From 1986 to 1998, Mr. Hauck held various positions in business development and sales, including certain executive positions, at Cirrus Logic Inc., a semiconductor company. Mr. Hauck holds a Bachelor of Electronic Engineering Technology from Ohio Institute of Technology.

Available Information

This annual report on Form 10-K, as well as our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act, are publicly available on our website (leadis.com) without charge immediately following our filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, a copy of this annual report is available without charge upon written request to: Investor Relations, Leadis Technology, Inc., 800 W. California Avenue, Suite 200, Sunnyvale, California 94086.

Our executive and administrative headquarters occupy approximately 11,840 square feet of a facility located in Sunnyvale, California, under a lease that expires in June 2010. In addition, we lease approximately 14,367 square feet in a facility in Korea under two leases, one that expires in June 2005 and one that expires in March 2006. This facility houses our primary engineering operations. We believe that our facilities are adequate for our current needs and that suitable additional or substitute space will be available as needed to accommodate our foreseeable expansion of operations. For additional information regarding obligations under leases, see Note 4 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements under the subheading “Operating leases,” which information is hereby incorporated by reference.

On March 2, 2005, a purported securities class action suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Leadis Technology, Inc., certain of its officers and its directors. The complaint alleges the defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1933 by making allegedly false and misleading statements in the company’s registration statement and prospectus filed on June 16, 2004 for our initial public offering. The complaint seeks unspecified damages on behalf of a class of purchasers that acquired shares of our common stock pursuant to our registration statement and prospectus. The claims appear to be based on allegations that at the time of the IPO demand for the company’s OLED products was already slowing and that the company failed to disclose that it was engaging in overshipments of its OLED product. We anticipate that similar additional actions may be filed in the future. The lawsuit is still in the preliminary stages, and it is not possible for us to quantify the extent of potential liability, if any.

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

10

Table of Contents

PART II

Our common stock is listed on The NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “LDIS.” As of December 31, 2004, there were approximately 53 stockholders of record. Since many holders’ shares are listed under their brokerage firms’ names, we estimate the actual number of stockholders to be over 1,500.

The following table sets forth the high and low closing prices, for the periods indicated, for our common stock as reported by The NASDAQ National Market:

No cash dividends were paid on our common stock in 2004.

Use of Proceeds from the Sale of Registered Securities

On June 15, 2004, our registration statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-113880) was declared effective for our initial public offering. As of December 31, 2004, we had invested the $76.5 million in net proceeds from the offering in money market funds, municipal bonds, commercial paper and government agency bonds. We intend to use these proceeds for general corporate purposes, including working capital, research and development, general and administrative expenses and capital expenditures. We may also use a portion of the net proceeds to fund possible investments in, or acquisitions of, complementary businesses, products or technologies or in establishing joint ventures, although none is currently contemplated.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

During the year ended December 31, 2004, we sold and issued the following securities which were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933:

(1) From January 1 to June 16, 2004, the date of our initial public offering, we sold an aggregate of 246,606 shares of our common stock (after giving effect to the 3 for 2 split of our common and preferred stock that took place on June 10, 2004) to employees, directors and consultants for cash consideration in the aggregate amount of $98,902 upon the exercise of stock options granted under our 2002 Equity Incentive Plan, none of which have been repurchased. The 2002 Equity Incentive Plan was amended and restated as our 2004 Equity Incentive Plan in connection with our initial public offering.

(2) From January 1 to June 16, 2004, we granted stock options to employees, directors and consultants under our 2002 Equity Incentive Plan covering an aggregate of 887,350 shares of common stock (after giving effect to the 3 for 2 split of our common and preferred stock that took place on June 10, 2004), at exercise prices ranging from $0.50 to $12.00 per share. Generally, one quarter of the shares subject to each option vest one year after the date of grant and the remaining shares vest monthly thereafter over three years.

(3) A warrant to purchase 192,060 shares of Series B at $1.174 per share was granted to one of our customers in January 2004. The number of shares covered by this warrant was based on sales activity from January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003. This warrant was valued at $216,000 and recorded as a reduction in revenue of

11

Table of Contents

$33,000 in 2002 and $183,000 in 2003. The value of this warrant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Upon completion of our initial public offering, this warrant became exercisable for common stock. This warrant was exercised in August 2004.

The issuances described in paragraphs (1) and (2) above were deemed exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in reliance on Rule 701 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 as offers and sales of securities pursuant to certain compensatory benefit plans and contracts relating to compensation in compliance with Rule 701. The issuance described in paragraph (3) above was deemed exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in reliance on Regulation D and/or Section 4(2) promulgated thereunder as transaction not involving any public offering.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

Information regarding our equity compensation plans will be contained in our definitive Proxy Statement with respect to our Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be held on May 24, 2005, under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information” and is incorporated by reference in this report.

You should read the following selected consolidated financial and operating information for Leadis Technology together with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”, including “Risk Factors”, and our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this annual report.

The selected consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003 and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements, which are included elsewhere in this annual report. The selected consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2002, December 31, 2001 and December 31, 2000 and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for the years ended December 31, 2001 and 2000 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements not included in this annual report. Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in future periods.

On May 15, 2004, our board of directors approved, and on June 10, 2004 our stockholders approved, an amendment to our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation to affect a 3 for 2 split of our common stock and preferred stock. All information related to common stock, preferred stock, options and warrants to purchase common or preferred stock and earnings per share included in these selected balance sheet data and selected consolidated statement of operations data has been retroactively adjusted to give effect to the stock split.

12

Table of Contents