We provide a wide range of features for both MPLS and Layer 2 Metro architectures
with industry-leading scalability and reliability. We were the first to deliver Layer 3 10 Gigabit Ethernet and we intend to pursue further innovation
that will expand our leadership.
Continue to Leverage our
Product Capabilities to Address Emerging Markets. This includes metropolitan area networking (MAN), Gigabit Ethernet storage area networking (SAN),
voice-over-IP (VoIP), and content distribution networks. As noted above, the key advantages of Gigabit Ethernet, such as price, simplicity, ease of
use, will allow this technology to migrate into many new adjacent markets over time. Our strategy is to position ourself to benefit from acceptance of
Gigabit Ethernet in such environments as MAN, SAN, VoIP, and content distribution. To accomplish this, we have added the necessary features and
enhancements to our products to provide an ideal solution for these customers. We work with select partners when additional non-networking hardware or
software is needed for solutions such as VoIP and SAN. This permits us to remain entirely focused on network infrastructure and provide complete
solutions to our customers.
Continue our Market
Leadership Position in Internet Traffic Management Systems. We believe demand for Internet traffic management intelligence capabilities will be a
very important growth area for web-based businesses and Internet service providers and an area of increasing importance to traditional enterprise
networks. We intend to maintain our leadership position in this market by continually improving the performance and functionality of our Internet
traffic management products. Designed to provide the highest level of performance and network intelligence capabilities, our products enable web-based
businesses and Internet service providers to rapidly deliver new revenue-generating applications and services to end-user customers, while providing a
high degree of service reliability.
Expand Global Sales
Organization. We intend to continue the global expansion of our sales organization utilizing a direct sales organization in the United States and
abroad, strategic channel partners outside the United States and select original equipment manufacturers. We intend to increase our worldwide sales
force and establish additional channel partner relationships to build greater worldwide sales presence.
Deliver World Class Service
and Support. We intend to expand our service and support infrastructure to meet the needs of our growing customer base. Our goal is to minimize our
customers’ network downtime by offering a wide range of service and support programs to meet individual customer needs, including prompt on-site
hardware repair and replacement, twenty-four hour, seven days-a-week web and telephone support, parts depots in strategic global locations,
implementation support, pre-sales service, system software and network management software upgrades, and technical documentation
updates.
Sales and Marketing
Our sales strategy includes domestic and
international field sales organizations, domestic and international resellers, OEM relationships, and marketing programs.
Domestic field sales. Our domestic field
sales organization establishes and maintains direct relationships with key accounts and strategic customers. To a lesser extent, our field organization
also works with resellers to assist in communicating product benefits to end-user customers and proposing networking solutions. As of December 31,
2003, our domestic sales organization consisted of 146 sales representatives and systems engineers.
Domestic resellers. Our domestic resellers
include regional networking system resellers and vertical resellers who focus on specific markets, such as small Internet service providers. We provide
sales and marketing assistance and training to our resellers, who in turn provide first level support to end-user customers. We intend to leverage our
relationship with key resellers to penetrate select vertical markets.
International sales. Internationally, product
fulfillment and first level support is provided by resellers and integrators. Our international resellers include Mitsui & Co., Inc., in Japan,
Samsung Electronics in Korea, Shanghai Gentek Corp. Ltd. and Global Technology Integrator Ltd. in China, Spot Distribution in the United Kingdom, and
Pan Dacom Networking AG and GE CompuNet in Germany. As of December 31, 2003, our international field organization consisted of 94 sales representatives
and system engineers who conduct sales, marketing, and support activities. Our international sales organization establishes and maintains direct
relationships with resellers, integrators and end-users. Our export sales represented 35%, 38%, and 35% of net revenues in 2003, 2002, and 2001,
respectively.
6
OEM/Co-Branding. We have OEM/Co-Branding
relationships established with Hewlett-Packard Company, Hitachi, Ltd., Lucent Technologies, Digital China Holdings Ltd. and NEC Corporation. Our OEMs
market and sell our products on a private label basis through their worldwide sales forces and also purchase our products for use in their own internal
networks. Our agreements with OEMs provide that the OEMs may postpone, cancel, increase or decrease any order prior to shipment without
penalty.
Marketing programs. We have numerous
marketing programs designed to inform existing and potential customers, the press, industry standard analyst groups, and resellers and OEMs, about
the capabilities and benefits of us and our products. Our marketing efforts also support the sale and distribution of our products through our field
organizations and channels. Our marketing efforts include advertising, public relations, participation in industry trade shows and conferences, public
seminars and Webcasts, participation in independent third-party product tests, presentations, and our maintenance of our web site.
Customer Service and Support
Our service and support organization maintains and
supports products sold by our field organization to end-users. Our service and support organization provides 24-hour assistance, including telephone,
Internet and worldwide web support. Our customer service offerings also include parts depots in strategic locations globally, implementation support,
and pre-sales service. Our resellers and OEMs are responsible for installation, maintenance and support services to their customers.
We provide all customers with our standard, limited
one-year hardware and 90-day software warranty. We also have four levels of customer service offerings to meet specific support needs. Our Titanium
service program provides the most comprehensive support and includes advance hardware replacement within four hours delivered by a trained technician
for on-site support. Our Gold service program is targeted towards customers who have trained internal resources to maintain their network 24x7. Our
Gold program is designed to provide all the tools needed by these trained resources to maximize the uptime of their network. Our Silver service program
is tailored for customers who typically purchase spares inventory as part of their overall contingency plan. Our Bronze service program is targeted
towards budget conscious customers who are looking for basic telephone and web-based support and run a 9 to 5 operation.
We have regional Centers-of-Excellence in San Jose,
Boston, New York, Chicago, Denver, Herndon, Irvine, London, Hong Kong, Toronto and Tokyo. These Centers-of-Excellence include executive briefing
centers and serve as major customer demonstration centers, regional technical support centers, and equipment depot centers. The Centers-of-Excellence
are fully equipped to demonstrate our award-winning, high-performance product lines including NetIron Metro routers, BigIron Layer 3 switches, FastIron
Enterprise switches, and ServerIron Layer 4-7 traffic management switches. They also support interoperability testing, provide hands-on training for
customers, and showcase our end-to-end LAN, MAN and WAN solutions. These Centers-of-Excellence allow us to deliver superior customer service and expand
service offerings to our rapidly growing worldwide installed base.
Quality Assurance
In 2003, we demonstrated our commitment to quality
assurance and testing by expanding and adding dedicated quality assurance test labs and facilities. Our software quality assurance test processes have
been enhanced and deepened. In particular, we have focused heavily on test automation so that testing is both comprehensive and expandable. In order to
continue to provide the highest level of customer service, our internal resolution labs were expanded in 2003 to approximately twice their previous
size. Because quality is a priority in all of our operating units, we have a quality council consisting of interdepartmental leaders that meet weekly
to monitor quality and to drive continuous improvement. The results of our enhancements are measured by several metrics, including the number of events
reported to customer support in relation to systems shipped.
Manufacturing
We operate under a modified “turn-key”
process, utilizing strategic manufacturing partners that are ISO 9000 certified and have global manufacturing capabilities. We maintain control and
procurement responsibility for all proprietary components. All designs, documentation, selection of approved suppliers, quality control, and
configuration are performed at our facilities. Our manufacturing operations consist of quality assurance for
7
subassemblies and final assembly and test. Our manufacturing process also includes
the configuration of hardware and software in unique combinations to meet a wide variety of individual customer requirements. We use automated testing
equipment and “burn-in” procedures, as well as comprehensive inspection and testing, to ensure the quality and reliability of our products.
Our approach to manufacturing provides the flexibility of outsourcing while maintaining quality control of products delivered to customers. We have
selected this approach to ensure our ability to respond to rapid growth and sudden market shifts.
We currently have four manufacturing partners.
Celestica, Inc., located in San Jose, California, Flash Electronics, Inc., in Fremont, California, and Proworks Inc, located in San Jose, California,
assemble and test printed circuit boards. Sanmina-SCI Corp., located in San Jose, assembles and tests printed circuit boards and our backplane
products. Celestica, Inc., Sanmina-SCI Corp., and Flash Electronics, Inc. have global manufacturing facilities providing full back-up capability and
local content for foreign sales if required. We perform all prototype and pre-production procurement and component qualification with support from our
manufacturing partners. Our agreements with our contract manufacturers allow them to procure long lead-time component inventory on our behalf based on
a rolling production forecast provided by us. We are contractually obligated to purchase long lead-time component inventory procured by our contract
manufacturers in accordance with our forecast, unless we give notice of order cancellation at least 90 days prior to the scheduled delivery
date.
We design all ASICs, printed circuit boards and
sheet metal, and work closely with semiconductor partners on future component selection and design support. All materials used in our products are
subject to a full qualification cycle and controlled by use of an “approved vendor listing” that must be followed by our sources. We perform
extensive testing of all of our products, including in-circuit testing of all printed circuit board assemblies, full functional testing, elevated
temperature burn-in and power cycling at maximum and minimum configuration levels. Please see “Risk Factors—Our reliance on third-party
manufacturing vendors to manufacture our products may cause a delay in our ability to fill orders” for a review of certain risks associated with
our manufacturing operations.
We currently purchase components from several
sources, including certain integrated circuits, power supplies and long-range optics, which we believe are readily-available from other suppliers. Our
proprietary ASICs, which provide key functionality in our products, are fabricated in foundries operated by, or subcontracted by, Texas Instruments
Inc., Fujitsu Ltd., and Broadcom Corp. An alternative supply for these ASICs would require an extensive development period. Please see “Risk
Factors—We purchase several key components for our products from several sources; if these components are not available, our revenues may be
harmed.”
Backlog
Our backlog represents orders for which a purchase
order has been received for product to be shipped generally within 90 days to customers with approved credit status. Orders are subject to
cancellation, rescheduling or product specification changes by the customers. Although we believe that our backlog is firm, orders may be cancelled by
the customer without penalty. For this reason, we believe our backlog at any given date is not a reliable indicator of future
revenues.
Research and Development
Our future success depends on our ability to enhance
existing products and develop new products that incorporate the latest technological developments. We work with customers and prospects, as well as
partners and industry research organizations, to identify and implement new solutions that meet the current and future needs of businesses. Whenever
possible, our products are based on industry standards to ensure interoperability. We intend to continue to support emerging industry standards
integral to our product strategy.
Our research and development operations involve
development activities that utilize both custom and commercial silicon, which enables us to quickly bring new products and features to market. We are
currently developing new switching solutions that provide new levels of performance, scalability and functionality We had 159 engineers at the end of
2003, compared to 153 engineers at the end of 2002 and 135 engineers in 2001. Our research and development expenses were $40.5 million in 2003, $34.9
million in 2002 and $33.9 million in 2001, or 10%, 12% and 11% of net revenues, respectively.
8
Competition
We believe we perform favorably with respect to key
competitive factors that affect our markets, including technical expertise, pricing, new product innovation, product features, service and support,
brand awareness and distribution. Our products have won numerous awards. We intend to remain competitive through ongoing investment in research and
development efforts to enhance existing products and introduce new products. We will seek to expand our market presence through aggressive marketing
and sales efforts and through the continued implementation of cost reduction efforts. However, our market is still evolving and we may not be able to
compete successfully against current and future competitors.
The market in which we operate is highly
competitive. Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”) maintains a dominant position in our market and several of its products compete directly with
ours. Cisco’s substantial resources and market dominance have enabled it to reduce prices on its products within a short period of time following
introduction, which reduces the profitability of its competitors. Purchasers of networking solutions may choose Cisco’s products because of its
longer operating history, broader product line and strong reputation in the networking market. In addition, Cisco may have developed or could in the
future develop new technologies that directly compete with our products or render our products obsolete. We believe our technology and the
purpose-built features of our products make them unique and allow us to compete effectively against Cisco and other competitors. Although we believe
that we are currently among the top providers of networking solutions, there can be no assurance that we will be able to compete successfully against
Cisco, currently the market leader in network infrastructure solutions.
In addition to Cisco, we compete against other
companies, such as Extreme Networks, Inc., Juniper Networks, Inc., Nortel Networks Ltd., Enterasys Networks Inc., 3Com Corp., Huawei Technologies Co.,
Ltd., and Alcatel. Some of our current and potential competitors have longer operating histories and substantially greater financial, technical, sales,
marketing and other resources, as well as greater name recognition and larger installed customer bases than we do. Furthermore, companies that do not
offer a directly competitive product to our products could develop new products or enter into agreements with other networking companies to provide a
product that competes with our products or provides a more complete solution than we can offer. Additionally, we may face competition from unknown
companies and emerging technologies that may offer new LAN, MAN, and WAN solutions. Please see “Risk Factors—Intense competition in the
market for network solutions could prevent us from maintaining or increasing revenue and sustaining profitability. ”
Intellectual Property
Our success and ability to compete are heavily
dependent on our internally developed technology and know-how. Our proprietary technology includes our ASICs, our IronCore and JetCore hardware
architecture, our IronWare software, our IronView network management software, and certain mechanical designs. Different variations and combinations of
these proprietary technologies are implemented across our product offerings. We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret
laws and contractual restrictions on disclosure to protect our intellectual property rights in these proprietary technologies.
We provide software to customers under license
agreements included in the packaged software. These agreements are not negotiated with or signed by the licensee, and thus may not be enforceable in
some jurisdictions. Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary rights through confidentiality and license agreements, unauthorized parties may
attempt to copy, imitate, or otherwise obtain and use our products or technology. These precautions may not prevent misappropriation or infringement of
our intellectual property. Monitoring unauthorized use of our products is difficult and the steps we have taken may not prevent misappropriation of our
technology, particularly in some foreign countries where the laws may not protect our proprietary rights as fully as in the United
States.
The networking industry is increasingly
characterized by the existence of a large number of patents, frequent claims of infringement, and related litigation regarding patent and other
intellectual property rights. In addition, leading companies in the networking market may have extensive patent portfolios. As a result of the
existence of a large number of patents and rapid rate of issuance of new patents in the networking industry, it is not economically practical for a
company of our size to determine in advance whether a product or any of its components may infringe intellectual property rights claimed by others. See
Item 3 “Legal Proceedings” below for pending litigation related to intellectual property matters and “Risk Factors—We may be
subject to intellectual property infringement claims that are costly to defend and could limit our ability to use certain technologies in the
future.”
9
Employees
As of December 31, 2003, we had 588 employees,
consisting of 308 in sales and marketing, 159 in engineering, 67 in manufacturing and 54 in general and administrative. None of our employees is
represented by a labor union, with the exception of several foreign employees who are required by local country employment laws to have labor union
representation. We have never experienced a work stoppage and believe our employee relations are good.
We are committed to our responsibility to maintain
employment practices that promote affirmative action and equal opportunity in hiring, promotions, compensation and employee development without regard
to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status or veteran status.
Item 2. Properties
Our headquarters for corporate administration,
research and development, sales and marketing, and manufacturing occupy approximately 110,000 square feet of space in San Jose, California. We also
lease space in various other geographic locations, domestically and internationally, for sales and service personnel. In addition to smaller sales
offices, we have regional offices in the following locations:
AMERICAS
|
|
|
|
EMEA
|
|
APAC
|
San Jose,
California |
|
|
|
|
London, England |
|
|
|
Tokyo, Japan |
|
Irvine,
California |
|
|
|
|
Munich, Germany |
|
|
|
Singapore |
|
Salt Lake City,
Utah |
|
|
|
|
Paris, France |
|
|
|
Hong Kong |
|
Chicago,
Illinois |
|
|
|
|
Amsterdam, Netherlands |
|
|
|
Sydney, Australia |
|
Fort Lauderdale,
Florida |
|
|
|
|
Milan, Italy |
|
|
|
Beijing, China |
|
New York City,
New York |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herndon,
Virginia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toronto,
Canada |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We believe our existing facilities are adequate to
meet current requirements, and that suitable additional or substitute space will be available as needed to accommodate any further physical expansion
of corporate operations and for any additional sales offices. Our principal web server equipment and operations are maintained in our corporate
headquarters in San Jose, California.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
In December 2000, several similar shareholder class
action lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
following our announcement of our anticipated financial results for the fourth quarter ended December 31, 2000. The lawsuits were subsequently
consolidated as a class action by the District Court, under the caption In re Foundry Networks, Inc. Securities Litigation, Master File No.
C-00-4823-MMC, lead plaintiffs were selected and filed a consolidated amended complaint which alleged violations of federal securities laws and
purported to seek damages on behalf of a class of shareholders who purchased our common stock during the period from September 7, 2000 to December 19,
2000. We then brought four successful motions to dismiss the complaint. Although the District Court granted each of the four dismissal motions, it also
provided plaintiffs leave to amend the complaint. On August 29, 2003, following the dismissal of the four amended complaints, the District Court
granted our motion to dismiss the case with prejudice and without leave to amend and, on September 2, 2003, entered judgment in our favor, dismissing
the plaintiff’s fifth amended complaint. On September 29, 2003, plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit (“Court of Appeals”). On January 15, 2004, the plaintiff/appellants filed their opening brief with the Court of Appeals. We
have reviewed the appeal and are in the process of preparing our response. We believe the District Court’s judgment validates our conviction that
the lawsuit is without merit and we will defend the District Court’s judgment vigorously.
A class action lawsuit was filed on November 27,
2001 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of our common stock alleging violations of
federal securities laws. The case was designated as In re Foundry Networks, Inc. Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, No. 01-CV-10640
(SAS) (S.D.N.Y.), related to In re Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, No. 21 MC 92 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y.). The case is brought purportedly
on behalf of all persons who purchased our common stock from September 27, 1999 through December 6, 2000. The operative amended complaint names as
defendants us and
10
three of our officers (the “Foundry Defendants”), including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer; and investment banking firms that served as underwriters for our initial public offering in September
1999. The amended complaint alleged violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, on the grounds that the registration statement for the initial public offering (“IPO”) failed to disclose that (i) the underwriters
agreed to allow certain customers to purchase shares in the IPO in exchange for excess commissions to be paid to the underwriters, and (ii) the
underwriters arranged for certain customers to purchase additional shares in the aftermarket at predetermined prices. The amended complaint also
appears to allege that false or misleading analyst reports were issued. Similar allegations were made in lawsuits challenging over 300 other initial
public offerings conducted in 1999 and 2000. The cases were consolidated for pretrial purposes. On February 19, 2003, the Court ruled on all
defendants’ motions to dismiss. In ruling on motions to dismiss, the Court must treat the allegations in the complaint as if they were true solely
for purposes of deciding the motions. The motion was denied as to claims under the Securities Act of 1933 in the case involving us. The same ruling was
made in all but 10 of the other cases. The Court dismissed the claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, against us and one of
the individual defendants and dismissed all of the Section 20(a) “control person” claims. The Court denied the motion to dismiss the Section
10(b) claims against our remaining individual defendants on the basis that those defendants allegedly sold our stock following the IPO, allegations
found sufficient purely for pleading purposes to allow those claims to move forward. A similar ruling was made with respect to 62 of the individual
defendants in the other cases. We have accepted a settlement proposal presented to all issuer defendants. Under the terms of this settlement,
plaintiffs will dismiss and release all claims against the Foundry Defendants in exchange for a contingent payment by the insurance companies
collectively responsible for insuring the issuers in all of the IPO cases and for the assignment or surrender of control of certain claims we may have
against the underwriters. The settlement, which is still being finalized, will require approval of the Court, which cannot be assured, after class
members are given the opportunity to object to the settlement or opt out of the settlement.
In March 2001, Nortel Networks Corp.
(“Nortel”) filed a lawsuit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging that certain of our
products infringe several of Nortel’s patents and seeking injunctive relief and unspecified damages. Nortel has also brought suit, on the same or
similar patents, against a number of other networking companies. We have analyzed the validity of Nortel’s claims and believe that Nortel’s
suit is without merit. We are committed to vigorously defending ourself against these claims. On October 9, 2002, we filed a lawsuit against Nortel in
the United States District Court, Northern District of California alleging that certain of Nortel’s products infringe one of our patents and
alleging breach of contract by Nortel. We are seeking injunctive relief and damages.
In May 2003, Lucent Technologies Inc.
(“Lucent”) filed a lawsuit against us in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that certain of our products
infringe several of Lucent’s patents, and seeking injunctive relief, as well as unspecified damages. Lucent also brought suit on the same patents
(and one additional patent) against one of our competitors. On August 12, 2003, we filed a motion to sever the cases, and on February 6, 2004, the
District Court granted the motion. The parties are in the process of rescheduling the court dates in view of the District Court’s order to sever
the cases. We have analyzed the validity of Lucent’s claims and believe that Lucent’s suit is without merit. We are committed to vigorously
defending ourself against Lucent’s claims.
On February 13, 2004, we filed a lawsuit against
Lucent in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. The lawsuit alleges that certain of Lucent’s products
infringe one of our patents. We are seeking injunctive relief and damages.
From time to time, we are subject to other legal
proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business, including claims of alleged infringement of trademarks, copyrights, patents and other
intellectual property rights. In addition, from time to time, third parties assert patent infringement claims against us in the form of letters,
lawsuits and other forms of communication. Regardless of the merits of our position, litigation is always an expensive and uncertain proposition. In
accordance with SFAS No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies” (“SFAS 5”), we record a liability when it is both probable that a
liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such provision would be adjusted on a quarterly basis to
reflect the effect of ongoing negotiations, settlements, rulings, advice of legal counsel, and other information and events pertaining to a particular
case. To date, we have not recorded any such provisions in accordance with SFAS 5. We believe we have valid defenses
11
with respect to the legal matters pending against us. In the event of a
determination adverse to us, we could incur substantial monetary liability, or be required to change our business practices. Any unfavorable
determination could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
Item 4. Submission Of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
No matters were submitted to a vote of security
holders during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003.
12
PART II
Item 5. Market For Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters
Price Range of Common Stock
Foundry’s common stock commenced trading on the
Nasdaq National Market on September 28, 1999 and is traded under the symbol “FDRY”. As of December 31, 2003, there were approximately 380
holders of record of the common stock. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sale prices for our common stock as reported on the
Nasdaq National Market.
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
27.68 |
|
|
$ |
21.88 |
|
Third
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
23.77 |
|
|
$ |
15.25 |
|
Second
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
16.00 |
|
|
$ |
7.92 |
|
First
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
10.13 |
|
|
$ |
7.39 |
|
|
2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
10.23 |
|
|
$ |
4.44 |
|
Third
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
9.50 |
|
|
$ |
5.48 |
|
Second
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
7.44 |
|
|
$ |
4.86 |
|
First
quarter |
|
|
|
$ |
9.30 |
|
|
$ |
5.62 |
|
Dividend Policy
We have never paid cash dividends on our capital
stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business and, therefore, do
not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.
Unregistered Securities Sold in 2003
We did not sell any unregistered shares of our
common stock during 2003.
13
Item 6. Selected Consolidated Financial Data
The selected consolidated financial data set forth
below should be read together with the consolidated financial statements and related notes, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and the other information contained in this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
2001
|
|
2000
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues,
net |
|
|
|
$ |
399,628 |
|
|
$ |
300,742 |
|
|
$ |
311,176 |
|
|
$ |
377,156 |
|
|
$ |
133,522 |
|
Gross
margin |
|
|
|
|
258,770 |
|
|
|
160,550 |
|
|
|
153,035 |
|
|
|
242,826 |
|
|
|
76,910 |
|
Gross margin
percentage |
|
|
|
|
65 |
% |
|
|
53 |
% |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
64 |
% |
|
|
58 |
% |
Income (loss)
from operations |
|
|
|
|
112,057 |
|
|
|
27,171 |
|
|
|
(1,591 |
) |
|
|
130,896 |
|
|
|
30,736 |
|
Net
income |
|
|
|
|
75,082 |
|
|
|
22,537 |
|
|
|
2,886 |
|
|
|
88,121 |
|
|
|
22,872 |
|
Basic net
income per share |
|
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
0.19 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
Diluted net
income per share |
|
|
|
$ |
0.55 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.69 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
2001
|
|
2000
|
|
1999
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
& |