SILICON IMAGE INC - FORM 10-Q

Attached files

file	filename
EXCEL - IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT - SILICON IMAGE INC	Financial_Report.xls
EX-10.01 - EXHIBIT 10.01 - SILICON IMAGE INC	exhibit_10-01.htm
EX-31.01 - EXHIBIT 31.01 - SILICON IMAGE INC	exhibit_31-01.htm
EX-32.01 - EXHIBIT 32.01 - SILICON IMAGE INC	exhibit_32-01.htm
EX-31.02 - EXHIBIT 31.02 - SILICON IMAGE INC	exhibit_31-02.htm
EX-32.02 - EXHIBIT 32.02 - SILICON IMAGE INC	exhibit_32-02.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

x	QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For quarterly period ended: June 30, 2011

OR

o	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 000-26887

Silicon Image, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware		77-0396307
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer I.D. Number)

1140 East Arques Avenue, Sunnyvale, California 94085

(Address of principal executive office)(Zip Code)

(408) 616-4000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

N/A

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year,

if changed since last report)

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a small reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “small reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer o	Accelerated filer x

Non-accelerated filer o	Smaller reporting company o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No x

CLASS		OUTSTANDING AT July 29, 2011
Common Stock, $0.001 par value		80,985,153

SILICON IMAGE, INC.

FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2011

Table of Contents


Part I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1 Financial Statements (Unaudited)	3
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010	3
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010	4
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010	5
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	6
Item 2 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	20
Item 3 Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	25
Item 4 Controls and Procedures	26
Part II OTHER INFORMATION	26
Item 1 Legal Proceedings	26
Item 1A Risk Factors	26
Item 2 Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	38
Item 3 Defaults Upon Senior Securities	38
Item 4 Reserved	38
Item 5 Other Information	38
Item 6 Exhibits	39
Signature	40

Part I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)

SILICON IMAGE, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands)

(unaudited)

	June 30, 2011			December 31, 2010
ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	40,926		$	29,942
Short-term investments		119,493			160,538
Accounts receivable, net of allowances for doubtful accounts of $1,637 at June 30, 2011 and $1,620 at December 31, 2010		29,691			22,598
Inventories		14,537			10,212
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		6,316			6,515
Deferred income taxes		1,130			1,008
Total current assets		212,093			230,813
Property and equipment, net		11,885			11,404
Intangible assets, net (Notes 14 and 15)		12,907			-
Goodwill (Notes 14 and 15)		18,646			-
Deferred income taxes, non-current		4,673			4,795
Other assets		11,082			3,607
Total assets	$	271,286		$	250,619
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	12,199		$	10,615
Accrued and other current liabilities		19,702			17,771
Deferred margin on sales to distributors		13,552			13,484
Deferred license revenue		3,089			4,197
Total current liabilities		48,542			46,067
Other long-term liabilities		14,721			13,356
Total liabilities		63,263			59,423
Commitments and contingencies (Note 9)
Stockholders’ Equity:
Convertible preferred stock, par value $0.001; 5,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued or outstanding		-			-
Common stock, par value $0.001; 150,000,000 shares authorized; shares issued and outstanding: 80,980,835 at June 30, 2011 and 78,191,027 at December 31, 2010		97			95
Additional paid-in capital		497,027			476,915
Treasury stock, shares issued, but not oustanding: 17,252,633 at June 30, 2011 and 17,076,173 at December 31, 2010		(109,206	)		(107,745	)
Accumulated deficit		(180,063	)		(177,957	)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		168			(112	)
Total stockholders’ equity		208,023			191,196
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	271,286		$	250,619

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Table of Contents

SILICON IMAGE, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

(unaudited)

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Revenue:
Product	$	42,019		$	38,364		$	80,076		$	64,657
Licensing		11,534			6,186			22,476			14,202
Total revenue		53,553			44,550			102,552			78,859
Cost of revenue and operating expenses:
Cost of product revenue (1)		22,267			19,489			42,139			34,311
Cost of licensing revenue		100			13			500			36
Research and development (2)		15,581			13,659			30,824			26,796
Selling, general and administrative (3)		13,840			11,141			26,891			23,171
Restructuring expense (Note 5)		732			268			1,097			853
Amortization of intangible assets		396			38			593			75
Total cost of revenue and operating expenses		52,916			44,608			102,044			85,242
Income (loss) from operations		637			(58	)		508			(6,383	)
Interest income and other, net		634			630			1,011			1,234
Income (loss) before provision for income taxes		1,271			572			1,519			(5,149	)
Income tax expense (benefit)		2,557			(1,203	)		3,625			318
Net income (loss)	$	(1,286	)	$	1,775		$	(2,106	)	$	(5,467	)

Net income (loss) per share – basic and diluted	$	(0.02	)	$	0.02		$	(0.03	)	$	(0.07	)
Weighted average shares – basic		80,223			76,718			79,477			76,364
Weighted average shares – diluted		80,223			77,511			79,477			76,364

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	134		$	145		$	314		$	329
(2) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	788		$	725		$	1,361		$	1,370
(3) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	1,089		$	1,115		$	2,221		$	2,446

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Table of Contents

SILICON IMAGE, INC.

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)

(unaudited)

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(2,106	)	$	(5,467	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Stock-based compensation expense		3,896			4,145
Depreciation		3,266			4,048
Amortization of investment premium		1,569			1,365
Tax benefits from employee stock-based transactions		1,433			-
Excess tax benefits from employee stock-based transactions		(1,433	)		-
Amortization of intangible assets		593			75
Realized gain on sale of short-term investments		(145	)		(84	)
Asset impairment due to restructuring		-			184
Others		181			51
Changes in assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		(6,560	)		4,085
Inventories		(2,774	)		(2,475	)
Prepaid expenses and other assets		(48	)		21,252
Accounts payable		(419	)		5,760
Accrued and other liabilities		(1,624	)		(15,029	)
Deferred license revenue		(1,590	)		1,481
Deferred margin on sales to distributors		68			2,168
Cash provided by (used in) operating activities		(5,693	)		21,559
Cash flows from investing activities:
Proceeds from sales of short-term investments		109,708			67,262
Purchases of short-term investments		(70,046	)		(96,546	)
Cash used in business acquisitions, net of cash acquired		(15,910	)		-
Purchases of property and equipment		(3,745	)		(2,322	)
Other investing activities		(7,090	)		-
Cash provided by (used in) investing activities		12,917			(31,606	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from issuances of common stock		4,354			1,300
Excess tax benefits from employee stock-based transactions		1,433			-
Repurchase of restricted stock units for income tax withholding		(1,461	)		(1,158	)
Payment of a line of credit assumed in business acquisition		(523	)		-
Cash provided by financing activities		3,803			142
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		(43	)		270
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		10,984			(9,635	)
Cash and cash equivalents — beginning of period		29,942			29,756
Cash and cash equivalents — end of period	$	40,926		$	20,121
Supplemental cash flow information:
Common stock issued in connection with business acquisition (1.3 million shares issued)	$	10,429		$	-
Restricted stock units vested	$	4,416		$	3,214
Net refund (cash payment) for income taxes	$	(3,111	)	$	20,566
Property and equipment purchased but not paid for	$	597		$	652

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Table of Contents

SILICON IMAGE, INC.

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

JUNE 30, 2011

(UNAUDITED)

1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION

In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Silicon Image, Inc. (the “Company”, “Silicon Image”, “we” or “our”) included herein have been prepared on a basis consistent with our December 31, 2010 audited financial statements and include all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to fairly state the condensed consolidated balance sheets of Silicon Image and our subsidiaries as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 and the related condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 and the related consolidated statements of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated. These interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010. Financial results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of future financial results.

2. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In June 2011, Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 220). This ASU provides the guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income, which eliminates the current option to report other comprehensive income and its components in the statement of changes in equity. The guidance allows two presentation alternatives: (1) present items of net income and other comprehensive income in one continuous statement, referred to as the statement of comprehensive income; or (2) in two separate, but consecutive, statements of net income and other comprehensive income. This guidance is effective as of the beginning of a fiscal year that begins after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted, but full retrospective application is required under both presentation alternatives. This Company is currently evaluating which presentation alternative it will utilize.

In May 2011, FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurements (ASC Topic 820). This ASU provides additional guidance on fair value disclosures. This guidance contains certain updates to the measurement guidance as well as enhanced disclosure requirements. The most significant change in disclosures is an expansion of the information required for “Level 3” measurements including enhanced disclosure for: (1) the valuation processes used by the reporting entity; and (2) the sensitivity of the fair value measurement to changes in unobservable inputs and the interrelationships between those unobservable inputs, if any. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011, with early adoption prohibited. Other than requiring additional disclosures on the Company’s “Level 3” disclosures, the adoption of this new guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

In December 2010, FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29, Business Combinations (ASC Topic 805). The amendments in this update specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. The amendments also improve the usefulness of the pro forma revenue and earnings disclosures by requiring a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments that are directly attributable to the business combination(s). The provisions under this ASU became effective for the Company beginning in fiscal year 2011. See Note 14 for the business acquisition related disclosures following this ASU guidance.

In January 2010, FASB issued ASU No. 2010-06, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (ASC Topic 820) — Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements. The ASU requires new disclosures about transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2 and separate disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements relating to Level 3 measurements. It also clarifies existing fair value disclosures about the level of disaggregation and about inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The new disclosures and clarifications of existing disclosures are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements. The provisions under this ASU became effective for the Company beginning in fiscal year 2011. Other than requiring additional disclosures, the adoption of this new guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.

Adoption of FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (ASC Topic 605) - Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements

In October 2009, FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (ASC Topic 605)- Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force. This guidance modifies the fair value requirements of ASC subtopic 605-25, Revenue Recognition-Multiple Element Arrangements by allowing the use of the “best estimate of selling price” in addition to vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE) and verifiable objective evidence (VOE) (now referred to as TPE standing for third-party evidence) for determining the selling price of a deliverable. A vendor is now required to use its best estimate of the selling price when VSOE or TPE of the selling price cannot be determined. In addition, the residual method of allocating arrangement consideration is no longer permitted. This update requires expanded qualitative and quantitative disclosures and became effective for the Company’s first quarter of fiscal year 2011. The Company adopted the provisions under this update beginning in fiscal year 2011. As a result of the adoption of ASU 2009-13, revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 was approximately $21,000 and $413,000, respectively, higher than the revenue that would have been recorded under the previous accounting rules.

As a result of the adoption of ASU 2009-13, the Company adopted the following accounting policy on licensing revenue recognition:

The Company derives revenue from the license of its intellectual property (IP). The Company enters into IP licensing agreements that generally provide licensees the right to incorporate its IP components in their products with terms and conditions that vary by licensee. Revenue earned under contracts with the Company’s licensees is classified as licensing revenue. The Company’s IP licensing agreements generally include multiple elements, which may include one or more off-the-shelf and/or customized IP licenses bundled with support services covering a fixed period of time, usually one year. For such multiple element IP licensing arrangements, the Company follows the guidance in FASB ASU No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (ASC Topic 605) - Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements, to determine whether there is more than one unit of accounting.

For multiple-element arrangements the Company allocates revenue to all deliverables based on their relative selling prices. In such circumstances, the Company uses a hierarchy to determine the selling price to be used for allocating revenue to deliverables: (i) vendor-specific objective evidence of fair value (VSOE), (ii) third-party evidence of selling price (TPE), and (iii) best estimate of the selling price (ESP). VSOE generally exists only when the Company sells the deliverable separately and is the price actually charged by the Company for that deliverable. ESPs reflect the Company’s best estimates of what the selling prices of elements would be if they were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis. For the elements of IP licensing agreements the Company concluded that VSOE exists only for its support services based on periodic stand-alone renewals. For all other elements in IP licensing agreements, the Company concluded that no VSOE or TPE exists because these elements are almost never sold on a stand-alone basis by the Company or its competitors.

The Company’s process for determining its ESP for deliverables without VSOE or TPE considers multiple factors that may vary depending upon the unique facts and circumstances related to each deliverable. The key factors considered by the Company in developing the ESPs include prices charged by the Company for similar offerings, if any, the Company’s historical pricing practices, the nature and complexity of different technologies being licensed.

Amounts allocated to the delivered off-the-shelf IP licenses are recognized at the time of sale provided the other conditions for revenue recognition have been met. Amounts allocated to the customized IP licenses are recognized by percentage of completion or completed contract method depending on the nature of the customization project. Amounts allocated to the support services are deferred and recognized on a straight-line basis over the support period, usually one year.

Table of Contents

3. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ materially from these estimates. Areas where significant judgment and estimates are applied include revenue recognition, stock based compensation, inventory valuation, realization of long lived assets, including goodwill and intangibles, income taxes, deferred tax assets, restructuring liabilities and legal matters. The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Silicon Image, Inc. and its subsidiaries after elimination of all intercompany balances and transactions.

Except for the new accounting policy on licensing revenue as set out above, no other changes have been made to the significant policies that the Company disclosed in the “Significant Accounting Policies” in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.

4. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

The Company has a share-based compensation program that provides its Board of Directors with broad discretion in creating equity incentives for employees, officers and non-employee board members. This program includes incentive and non-statutory stock option grants and restricted stock units (RSUs) for employees, and an automatic grant program for non-employee board members pursuant to which such individuals will receive grants at designated intervals over their period of board service. These awards are granted under the stockholder approved 2008 Equity Incentive Plan. Grants under the discretionary grant program generally vest as follows: 25% of the shares vest on the first anniversary of the vesting commencement date and the remaining 75% vest proportionately each month over the next 36 months of continued service. Stock option grants to non-employee members of our board vest monthly, over periods not to exceed four years. Some options provide for accelerated vesting if certain identified milestones are achieved, upon a termination of employment or upon a change in control of the Company. RSU grants generally vest over a one to four-year period and certain of the RSU grants also have performance based vesting criteria. Additionally, our Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) that allows employees to purchase shares of common stock at the lower of 85% of the fair market value on the commencement date of the six-month offering period or on the last day of the six-month offering period.

Valuation and Expense Information Under Stock-based Compensation

Share-based compensation expense recognized under FASB ASC No. 718-10-30, Initial Measurement of Stock Compensation, consists primarily of expenses for the share-based awards discussed above.

The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes- Merton option valuation model and the straight-line attribution approach with the following assumptions:

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Employee stock option plans:
Expected life in years		4.0			4.2			4.0			4.2
Expected volatility		70.4	%		64.7	%		69.7	%		64.2	%
Risk-free interest rate		1.3	%		1.8	%		1.5	%		1.9	%
Expected dividends	none			none			none			none
Weighted average fair value	$	3.27		$	1.83		$	3.60		$	1.59

Employee Stock Purchase Plan:
Expected life in years		0.5			0.5			0.5			0.5
Expected volatility		71.1	%		51.7	%		71.1	%		51.7	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.2	%		0.2	%		0.2	%		0.2	%
Expected dividends	none			none			none			none
Weighted average fair value	$	3.04		$	0.71		$	3.04		$	0.71

Valuation and amortization method — The Company estimates the fair value of stock options granted using the Black-Scholes-Merton option valuation model and a single option award approach. This fair value is then amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service periods of the awards, which is generally the vesting period.

Expected Life — The expected life of the options represents the estimated period of time until exercised and is based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms, vesting schedules, and expectations of future employee behavior. The expected term for the ESPP is based on the term of the purchase period.

Expected Volatility — The volatility rate is based on the Company’s historical common stock volatility derived from historical stock price data for historical periods commensurate with the options’ expected life.

Risk-Free Interest Rate —The risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield currently available on United States Treasury zero-coupon issues with a term equal to the expected life at the date of grant of the options.

Expected Dividend — The expected dividend is based on our history and expected dividend payouts. The expected dividend yield is zero as the Company has historically paid no dividends and does not anticipate dividends to be paid in the future.

As required by FASB ASC 718-10-35, Subsequent Measurement of Stock Compensation, management made an estimate of expected forfeitures and is recognizing stock-based compensation expense only for those equity awards expected to vest.

For the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 no shares were purchased under the ESPP program. For the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, 514,111 and 596,485 shares were purchased under the ESPP program, respectively. At June 30, 2011, the Company had $158,000 of total unrecognized compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures under the ESPP program. The unamortized compensation expense will be amortized on a straight-line basis over a period of approximately 1.5 months.

Table of Contents

Stock Options Activity

The following is a summary of activity under the Company’s stock option plans during the six months ended June 30, 2011, excluding RSUs (in thousands, except weighted average exercise price):

				Weighted		Weighted
				Average		Average
				Exercise		Remaining		Aggregate
	Number of			Price per		Contractual		Intrinsic
	Shares			Share		Terms in Years		Value
At January 1, 2011		4,965		$	5.54
Granted		1,848			6.81
Forfeitures and cancellations		(157	)		7.16
Exercised		(614	)		4.40
At June 30, 2011		6,042		$	6.01		5.64	$	8,437
Vested and expected to vest at June 30, 2011		5,085		$	6.15		5.42	$	6,978
Exercisable at June 30, 2011		2,504		$	7.25		4.00	$	2,798

The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the total pre-tax intrinsic value that option holders would have received had all option holders exercised their options on June 30, 2011. The aggregate intrinsic value is the difference between the Company's closing stock price on the last trading day of the second quarter of fiscal 2011 and the exercise price, multiplied by the number of outstanding or exercisable in-the-money options. The aggregate intrinsic value excludes the effect of stock options that have a zero or negative intrinsic value. The total pre-tax intrinsic value of options exercised, representing the difference between the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the exercise and the exercise price of each option, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 was $374,000 and $2.7 million, respectively, and was insignificant for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 due to limited number of exercises during those periods. The total fair value as of the vesting date of the options which vested was $0.5 million and $0.9 million during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and $1.2 million and $2.7 million during the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively.

At June 30, 2011, the total unrecognized pre-tax stock-based compensation expense related to stock options, which the Company expects to recognize over the remaining weighted-average vesting period of 3.11 years, was $6.3 million, net of estimated forfeitures.

Restricted Stock Units

The RSUs that the Company grants to its employees typically vest ratably over a certain period of time, subject to the employee’s continuing service to the Company over that period. RSUs granted to non-executive employees typically vest over a four-year period. RSUs granted to executive officers typically vest over a period of between one and four years.

RSUs are converted into shares of the Company’s common stock upon vesting on a one-for-one basis. The cost of the RSUs is determined using the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant. Compensation is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of each grant adjusted for estimated forfeitures. Each RSU award granted from the 2008 Plan will reduce the number of options available for issuance by 1.5 shares.

A summary of activity with respect to the Company’s RSUs during the six months ended June 30, 2011 is as follows: (in thousands, except weighted-average grant date fair value per share):

	Number of Units			Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding at January 1, 2011		2,719		$	3.49
Granted		1,974		$	6.93
Vested		(538	)	$	3.16
Forfeitures and cancellations		(137	)	$	5.41
Outstanding at June 30, 2011		4,018		$	5.14

The total grant date fair value of the RSUs that vested during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 was $0.8 million and $1.7 million, respectively, and $0.5 million and $4.4 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. Of the 4,018,000 RSUs outstanding as of June 30, 2011, approximately 3,191,000 units are expected to vest after considering the applicable forfeiture rate.

At June 30, 2011, the total unrecognized pre-tax stock-based compensation expense related to non-vested RSUs, which the Company expects to recognize over the remaining weighted-average vesting period of 2.19 years, was $9.8 million, net of estimated forfeitures.

During the three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, the Company repurchased 54,823 and 37,658 shares of stock, respectively, for an aggregate value of $393,000 and $137,000, respectively, from the employees upon the vesting of their RSUs that were granted under the Company’s 2008 Equity Incentive Plan to satisfy the employees’ minimum statutory tax withholding requirement. During the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, the Company repurchased 176,460 and 438,567 shares of stock, respectively, for an aggregate value of $1.5 million and $1.2 million, respectively. The Company will continue to repurchase shares of stock from employees as their RSUs vest to satisfy the employees’ minimum statutory tax withholding requirement.

Table of Contents

Stock-based Compensation Expense

The table below shows total stock-based compensation expense included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
Cost of sales	$	134	$	145	$	314	$	329
Research and development		788		725		1,361		1,370
Selling, general and administrative		1,089		1,115		2,221		2,446
	$	2,011	$	1,985	$	3,896	$	4,145

No income tax effect is shown due to the full valuation allowance.

5. RESTRUCTURING CHARGES AND EXIT COSTS

For the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company recorded restructuring expense of approximately $0.7 million and $1.1 million, respectively, which primarily consisted of severance and benefits of terminated employees and cost relating to operating lease commitments on exited facilities.

For the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, the Company recorded restructuring expense of approximately $0.3 million and $0.9 million, respectively, which was primarily related to operating lease commitments on exited facilities, impairment of certain fixed assets, and legal and other restructuring related costs which were recognized as incurred.

The table below summarizes the Company’s restructuring activities for the six months ended June 30, 2011 (in thousands):

	Employee Severance and Benefits			Operating Lease and Other Agreements Cancellation			Total
Accrued restructuring balance as of January 1, 2011	$	-		$	1,849		$	1,849
Additional accruals/adjustments		902			195			1,097
Cash payments		(596	)		(1,379	)		(1,975	)
Foreign currency changes		-			60			60
Accrued restructuring balance as of June 30, 2011	$	306		$	725		$	1,031

6. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

The components of comprehensive income (loss), net of related taxes, were as follows (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
Net income (loss)	$	(1,286	)	$	1,775		$	(2,106	)	$	(5,467	)
Changes in unrealized value of investments		51			(161	)		41			(282	)
Gain (loss) from foreign currency hedges		13			(366	)		84			(409	)
Foreign currency changes		12			49			155			454
Total comprehensive income (loss)	$	(1,210	)	$	1,297		$	(1,826	)	$	(5,704	)

7. NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

Basic net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period, excluding shares subject to repurchase and diluted net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted-average number of common shares and dilutive equivalents outstanding during the period, if any, determined using the treasury stock method. The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted net income (loss) per share (in thousands, except per share amounts):

	Three Months Ended June 30,					Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010		2011			2010
Numerator:
Net income (loss)	$	(1,286	)	$	1,775	$	(2,106	)	$	(5,467	)
Denominator:
Weighted average outstanding shares used to compute basic net income (loss) per hare		80,223			76,718		79,477			76,364
Effect of dilutive securities		-			793		-			-
Weighted-average diluted outstanding shares used to compute diluted net income (loss) per share		80,223			77,511		79,477			76,364

Net income (loss) per share: – basic and diluted	$	(0.02	)	$	0.02	$	(0.03	)	$	(0.07	)

As a result of the net loss for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, approximately 5.7 million and 5.7 million common stock equivalents, respectively, were excluded in the computation of diluted net loss per share because their effect would have been anti-dilutive.

For the three months ended June 30, 2010, approximately 10.0 million weighted common stock equivalents were excluded from the calculation of diluted net income per share because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. As a result of the net loss for the six months ended June 30, 2010, approximately 10.8 million common stock equivalents were excluded in the computation of diluted net loss per share because their effect would have been anti-dilutive.

Table of Contents

8. BALANCE SHEET COMPONENTS

The table below shows the components of the Company’s inventories, prepaid expense and other current assets, property and equipment, other assets, accrued and other current liabilities and other long-term liabilities (in thousands).

	June 30, 2011			December 31, 2010
Inventories:
Raw materials	$	7,191		$	3,558
Work in process		1,809			1,753
Finished goods		5,537			4,901
	$	14,537		$	10,212


Prepaid expense and other current assets:
Prepaid expenses and software maintenance	$	2,972		$	3,418
Interest receivable		983			1,292
Others		2,361			1,805
	$	6,316		$	6,515

Property and equipment:
Equipment	$	30,731		$	30,523
Computers and software		20,875			21,387
Furniture and fixtures		2,501			2,470
		54,107			54,380
Less: accumulated depreciation		(42,222	)		(42,976	)
Total property and equipment, net	$	11,885		$	11,404

Other assets:
Advances for intellectual properties	$	8,500		$	-
Bridge loan to a third party company (see Notes 12 and 16)		1,000			-
Secured note with a third party company (see Note 12)		590			3,000
Operating lease deposits		729			321
Others		263			286
	$	11,082		$	3,607

Accrued and other current liabilities:
Accrued payroll and related expenses	$	6,188		$	6,691
Accrued royalties		4,193			4,240
Accrued product rebate		1,825			100
Accrued restructuring (see Note 5)		1,031			1,849
Others		6,465			4,891
	$	19,702		$	17,771

Other long-term liabilities:
Non-current liability for uncertain tax positions	$	12,056		$	11,858
Non-current deferred license revenue		1,492			1,498
Others		1,173			-
	$	14,721		$	13,356

Table of Contents

9. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal Proceedings

On December 7, 2001, the Company and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants, along with the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering, in a securities class action lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants participated in a scheme to inflate the price of the Company’s stock in its initial public offering and in the aftermarket through a series of misstatements and omissions associated with the offering. The lawsuit is one of several hundred similar cases pending in the Southern District of New York that have been consolidated by the court. In February 2003, the District Court issued an order denying a motion to dismiss by all defendants on common issues of law. In July 2003, the Company, along with over 300 other issuers named as defendants, agreed to a settlement of this litigation with plaintiffs. While the parties’ request for court approval of the settlement was pending, in December 2006 the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the District Court’s determination that six focus cases could be certified as class actions. In April 2007, the Second Circuit denied plaintiffs’ petition for rehearing, but acknowledged that the District Court might certify a more limited class. At a June 26, 2007 status conference, the Court terminated the proposed settlement as stipulated among the parties. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 14, 2007. On September 27, 2007, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification in the six focus cases, which was withdrawn on October 10, 2008. On November 13, 2007 defendants in the six focus cases filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim, which the district court denied in March 2008. Plaintiffs, the issuer defendants (including the Company), the underwriter defendants, and the insurance carriers for the defendants, have engaged in mediation and settlement negotiations. The parties have reached a settlement agreement, which was submitted to the District Court for preliminary approval on April 2, 2009. As part of this settlement, the Company’s insurance carrier has agreed to assume the Company’s entire payment obligation under the terms of the settlement. On June 10, 2009, the District Court granted preliminary approval of the proposed settlement agreement. After a September 10, 2009 hearing, the District Court gave final approval to the settlement on October 5, 2009. Several objectors to the settlement have filed notices of appeal to the United States Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit from the District Court’s order granting final approval of the settlement. Although the District Court has granted final approval of the settlement agreement, there can be no guarantee that it will not be reversed on appeal. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to these claims. If the settlement is not implemented and the litigation continues against the Company, the Company would continue to defend against this action vigorously. In light of the uncertainty of the appellate process, and any subsequent proceedings in the trial court in the event the settlement is reversed on appeal, the Company is unable to determine the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome against them and is unable to reasonably estimate a range of loss, if any.

On July 31, 2007, the Company received a demand on behalf of alleged stockholder Vanessa Simmonds that its board of directors prosecute a claim against the underwriters of its initial public offering, in addition to certain unidentified officers, directors and principal stockholders as identified in the Company’s IPO prospectus, for violations of sections 16(a) and 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In October 2007, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington by Ms. Simmonds against certain of the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering. The plaintiff alleges that the underwriters engaged in short-swing trades and seeks disgorgement of profits in amounts to be proven at trial from the underwriters. On February 25, 2008, Ms. Simmonds filed an amended complaint. The suit names the Company as a nominal defendant, contains no claims against the Company and seeks no relief from it. This lawsuit is one of more than fifty similar actions filed in the same court. On July 25, 2008, the underwriter defendants in the various actions filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaints for failure to state a claim. In addition, certain issuer defendants in the various actions filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaints for failure to state a claim. The parties entered into a stipulation, entered as an order by the court that the Company is not required to answer or otherwise respond to the amended complaint. Accordingly, the Company did not join the motion to dismiss filed by certain issuers. On March 12, 2009, the court dismissed the complaint in this lawsuit with prejudice. On April 10, 2009, the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the District Court’s order, and thereafter the underwriter defendants’ filed a cross appeal to a portion of the District Court’s order that dismissed thirty (30) of the cases without prejudice following the moving issuers’ motion to dismiss. On May 22, 2009, an order was issued granting the parties’ joint motion to consolidate the 54 appeals and 30 cross-appeals. Oral argument in the Ninth Circuit was heard on October 5, 2010, and the Court issued its written opinion on December 2, 2010. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision that the demand letters that plaintiff submitted to the thirty moving issuers were inadequate and directed the District Court to dismiss those actions with prejudice. The Ninth Circuit further directed the District Court to consider in the first instance whether the demand letters submitted to the other 24 issuers (including the Company) were sufficiently similar as also to require dismissal with prejudice. The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision in favor of the underwriter defendants on statute of limitations grounds. On December 16, 2010, plaintiff and the underwriter defendants separately petitioned for a rehearing and a rehearing en banc, which petitions were denied on January 18, 2011. On January 25 and 26, 2011, the Ninth Circuit granted the motions of the underwriter defendants and of the plaintiff to stay the issuance of the court’s mandate pending those parties’ respective petitions for review by the United States Supreme Court. On April 5 and April 15, 2011, respectively, plaintiff and the underwriter defendants filed their petitions for review in the Supreme Court. On June 27, 2011, the Supreme Court granted the petition of the underwriter defendants and denied the petition of the plaintiff. No date has been set for oral argument in the Supreme Court. Due to the complexities and uncertainty surrounding the possible proceedings in the Supreme Court and the possible proceedings in the trial court, the Company is unable to determine either the likelihood of an outcome in favor of the plaintiff, or whether any ultimate recovery of short-swing profits might result in a net recovery in our favor in light of the expenses of any future proceedings.

In addition, the Company has been named as a defendant in a number of judicial and administrative proceedings incidental to its business and may be named again from time to time. The Company intends to defend the above matters vigorously and although adverse decisions or settlements may occur in one or more of such cases, the final resolution of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

The Company intends to defend the above matters vigorously and although adverse decisions or settlements may occur in one or more of such cases, the final resolution of these matters, individually or in the aggregate, is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Table of Contents

Guarantees

Certain of the Company’s licensing agreements indemnify its customers for any expenses or liabilities resulting from claimed infringements of third party patents, trademarks or copyrights by its products. Certain of these indemnification provisions are perpetual from execution of the agreement and, in some instances; the maximum amount of potential future indemnification is not limited. To date, the Company has not paid any such claims or been required to defend any lawsuits with respect to any such claim.

Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Operating Leases

The Company’s future operating lease commitments at June 30, 2011 were as follows (in thousands):

		Total				2011				2012				2013				2014				2015				Thereafter
Operating lease obligations		$	11,673			$	1,862			$	1,759			$	1,414			$	1,471			$	1,599			$	3,568

On January 6, 2011, the Company entered into a seven-year lease agreement (the “Lease”) with Christensen Holdings, L.P., a California limited partnership. Pursuant to the Lease, the Company leases an office building in Sunnyvale, California consisting of approximately 128,154 square feet, together with the non-exclusive right to use parking facilities and other amenities. The monthly base rent payment for the first year of the Lease is $108,931, with annual increases of 4% in the second, third and fourth years of the Lease and with an annual increases of 9%, 8% and 7% in the fifth, sixth and seventh years of the Lease, respectively. This facility is the Company’s new corporate headquarters, which the Company began occupying in July 2011.

The Company also leases an operating facility in Irvine, California, pursuant to a non-cancelable operating lease agreement with a term that extends through November 2012.

As a result of the Company’s acquisition of SiBEAM, Inc., the Company assumed a non-cancelable operating lease agreement for an operating facility located in Sunnyvale, California. The term of the lease agreement extends through September 2012.

The Company also leases office spaces in China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.

Other Contractual Obligations

As of June 30, 2011, the Company is committed to make payment relating to a certain engineering services agreement of approximately $1.1 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2011.

10. CUSTOMER AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION

The Company operates in one reportable operating segment, semiconductors and IP solutions for the secure storage, distribution and presentation of high-definition content. The Company’s Chief Executive Officer, who is considered to be the Company’s chief operating decision maker, reviews financial information presented on one operating segment basis for purposes of making operating decisions and assessing financial performance.

Revenue

The Company attributes revenue to geographic regions based on the “bill to address” location as specified in the customers’ agreements. The following table presents the revenue by geographic region based on bill to location (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
Taiwan	$	18,299	$	8,673	$	30,681	$	15,213
United States		14,255		10,961		25,033		21,404
Japan		9,528		15,222		25,040		23,102
China		4,055		3,989		8,562		6,474
Europe		4,051		3,864		6,871		8,542
Korea		2,918		1,266		5,431		2,937
Others		447		575		934		1,187
Total revenue	$	53,553	$	44,550	$	102,552	$	78,859

Table of Contents

Reclassifications

Beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2011, the Company has reclassified its product revenue under the following three market categories: 1) Consumer Electronics (CE); 2) Mobile; and 3) Personal Computers (PC). Previously, the Company reported its product revenue under the following three market categories: 1) CE, 2) PC and 3) Storage. As a result of this change, the Company’s CE product category now consists of the DTV and Home Theater markets. The Company’s mobile category now incorporates all mobile-related activities, including both HDMI and MHL. PC consists of all PC and Storage related activities.

As a result of the change in the reported market categories, the revenue reported for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 under the previous primary market categorization was reclassified to conform to the revenue presentation for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. This reclassification did not impact the Company's previously reported net revenues, operating income, net income, or earnings per share.

The Company’s revenue by its primary markets was as follows (in thousands):

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011		2010		2011		2010
Consumer Electronics	$	19,436	$	30,028	$	45,691	$	51,979
Mobile		16,960		1,802		23,131		2,570
Personal Computers		5,623		6,534		11,254		10,108
Total product revenue		42,019		38,364		80,076		64,657
Licensing		11,534		6,186		22,476		14,202
Total revenue	$	53,553	$	44,550	$	102,552	$	78,859

For the three months ended June 30, 2011, three customers each represented 20.5%, 20.3% and 11.7% of the Company’s revenue. For the six months ended June 30, 2011, three customers each represented 16.9%, 15.7% and 11.2% of the Company’s revenue. At June 30, 2011, two customers each represented 26.9% and 10.0% of net accounts receivable.

For the three months ended June 30, 2010, three customers each represented 16.2%, 12.5% and 11.4% of the Company’s revenue. For the six months ended June 30, 2010, two customers each represented 17.7% and 11.2% of the Company’s revenue. At June 30, 2010, three customers each represented 14.1%, 13.9% and 12.3% of net accounts receivable.

Property and Equipment

The table below presents the net book value of the property and equipment by their physical location (in thousands):

	June 30, 2011		December 31, 2010
Location
United States	$	6,433	$	5,634
China		2,773		2,877
Taiwan		2,052		2,030
Others		627		863
Net book value	$	11,885	$	11,404

11. PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES

The Company recorded an income tax expense of $2.6 million and $3.6 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively. The effective tax rates for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 were 201.2% and 238.6%, respectively, and were based on the Company’s projected taxable income for 2011, plus certain discrete items recorded during the quarter. The difference between the provision for income taxes and the income tax determined by applying the statutory federal income tax rate of 35% was due primarily to foreign taxes, a provision for charges in lieu of income taxes related to employee stock plans where the windfall benefit is charged to tax expense with the benefit to additional paid-in capital and state taxes.

The Company continued to maintain a valuation allowance as a result of uncertainties related to the realization of its net deferred tax assets at June 30, 2011. The valuation allowance was established as a result of weighing all positive and negative evidence, including the Company’s cumulative loss over the past three years. The valuation allowance reflects the conclusion of management that it is more likely than not that benefits from certain deferred tax assets will not be realized. If actual results differ from these estimates or these estimates are adjusted in future periods, the valuation allowance may require adjustment which could materially impact the Company’s financial position and results of operations.

The Company recorded an income tax benefit of $1.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and income tax expense of $318,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The effective tax rates for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 were 210.3% and 6.2%, respectively, and were based on the Company’s projected taxable income for 2010, plus certain discrete items recorded during the quarter. The difference between the provision for income taxes and the income tax determined by applying the statutory federal income tax rate of 35% was due primarily to state taxes and foreign taxes, partially offset by a benefit of the carryback of the current year federal net operating loss adjusted for certain discrete items recorded during the quarter.

The Company’s policy is to include interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within the provision for income taxes. The Company had interest and penalties of $52,000 and $103,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and approximately $80,000 and $174,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. The Company conducts business globally and, as a result, the Company and its subsidiaries file income tax returns in various jurisdictions throughout the world including with the U.S. federal and various U.S. state jurisdictions as well as with various foreign jurisdictions. In the normal course of business, the Company is subject to examination by taxing authorities throughout the world.

Table of Contents

12. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Measurement of Fair Value

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received from selling an asset or the price paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and it considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability.

Fair Value Hierarchy

A fair value hierarchy is based on whether the market participant assumptions used in determining fair value are obtained from independent sources (observable inputs) or reflects the Company’s own assumptions of market participant valuation (unobservable inputs). A financial instrument’s categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value are:

Level 1 — Quoted prices in active markets that are unadjusted and accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;

Level 2 — Quoted prices for identical assets and liabilities in markets that are inactive; quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets or financial instruments for which significant inputs are observable, either directly or indirectly; or

Level 3 — Prices or valuations that require inputs that are both unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

The Company’s short term investments are generally classified within Level 1 or Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency.

Level 1 assets consist generally of U.S. government and agency securities. These instruments are generally classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued based on quoted market prices in active markets.

The Company classifies items in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy if the financial asset or liability is valued using observable inputs. The Company uses observable inputs including quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities. The Company’s Level 2 financial assets include corporate and municipal securities. These investments are priced using observable inputs and valuation models, which vary by asset class. The fair values of all of the Company’s investments in corporate and municipal securities are determined through the assistance of a third party pricing service. For the short-term investments in the Company’s portfolio, multiple pricing sources are generally available. The pricing service uses inputs from multiple industry standard data providers or other third party sources and various methodologies, such as weighting and models, to determine the appropriate price at the measurement date.

The Company’s Level 3 assets consist of a secured note with a third party company which is secured by certain current assets and bridge loan extended to a third party company in anticipation of the Company’s investment in the equity of such third party company. See Note 16 for the conversion of the bridge loan into an equity investment subsequent to June 30, 2011. Since there is no active market for these types of notes or loans, they are valued using a valuation model which is based on the income approach and reflects both observable and significant unobservable inputs. The carrying value of these loans or notes approximates the fair market value due to the relatively short period of time to maturity or realization.

The table below sets forth the Company’s assets and liabilities as of June 30, 2011, which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the fair value hierarchy. The assets are classified based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

	Fair value measurements using							Assets (Liabilities)
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3			at fair value
Short-term investments:	(In thousands)
United States government agencies	$	10,134	$	-	$	-		$	10,134
Municipal securities		-		89,360		-			89,360
Corporate securities		-		19,999		-			19,999
Total short-term investments at fair value		10,134		109,359		-			119,493
Other assets:
Bridge loan to a third party company		-		-		1,000			1,000
Secured note with a third party company		-		-		590			590
Total other assets at fair value		-		-		1,590			1,590
Liabilities:
Contingent payments in connection with a business acquisition (Note 14)		-		-		(1,481	)		(1,481	)

Total net assets measured at fair value	$	10,134	$	109,359	$	109		$	119,602

Table of Contents

The following table presents the changes in the Company’s Level 3 assets and liabilities, which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis, for the six months ended June 30, 2011 (in thousands):

	Fair Value Measurement Using Level 3 Inputs
	Assets			Liabilities
Beginning balance at January 1, 2011	$	3,000		$	-
Issuances		7,090			(1,481	)
Conversion of secured notes to advances for intellectual properties		(8,500	)		-
Ending Balance at June 30, 2011	$	1,590		$	(1,481	)

Issuances during the six months ended June 30, 2011 were related to approximately $6.1 million advances to a third party company pursuant to secured notes and $1.0 million bridge loan extended to a third party company.

No gains or losses from these assets and liabilities were recognized during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the Company held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. There were no transfers between Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 fair value hierarchies during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011.

The table below sets forth the Company’s short-term investments as of December 31, 2010, which were measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the fair value hierarchy. The assets were classified based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement (in thousands).

	Fair value measurements using				Assets
	Level 1		Level 2		at fair value
Short-term investments:
United States government agencies	$	19,480	$	-	$	19,480
Municipal securities		-		79,472		79,472
Corporate securities		-		61,586		61,586
Total short-term investments at fair value	$	19,480	$	141,058	$	160,538

There were no transfers between Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 fair value hierarchies during fiscal year 2010.

13. DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS

The Company accounts for derivative instruments in accordance with the provisions of FASB ASC No. 815-20-25, Derivatives and Hedging – Hedging Recognition. The Company recognizes derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities and measures those instruments at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative depends on the intended use of the derivative and the resulting designation. The Company’s derivatives are designated as cash flow hedges. For a derivative instrument designated as a cash flow hedge, the effective portion of the derivative’s gain or loss is initially reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income and subsequently reclassified into earnings when the hedged exposure affects earnings. The ineffective portion of the gain (loss) is reported immediately in other income (expense) on the Company’s consolidated statement of operations.

Silicon Image is a global company that is exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations in the normal course of its business. The Company has operations in the United States, Europe and Asia, however, a majority of its revenue, costs of revenue, expense and capital purchasing activities are being transacted in U.S. Dollars. As a corporation with international as well as domestic operations, the Company is exposed to changes in foreign exchange rates. These exposures may change over time and could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial results. Periodically, the Company uses foreign currency forward contracts to hedge certain forecasted foreign currency transactions relating to operating expenses. The Company does not enter into derivatives for speculative or trading purposes. The Company uses derivative instruments primarily to manage exposures to foreign currency fluctuations on forecasted cash flows and balances primarily denominated in Euro. The Company’s primary objective in holding derivatives is to reduce the volatility of earnings and cash flows associated with changes in foreign currency exchange rates. These derivatives are designated as cash flow hedges and have maturities of less than one year.

The derivatives expose the Company to credit and non performance risks to the extent that the counterparties may be unable to meet the terms of the agreement. The Company seeks to mitigate such risks by limiting the counterparties to major financial institutions. In addition, the potential risk of loss with any one counterparty resulting from this type of credit risk is monitored. Management does not expect material losses as a result of defaults by counterparties.

The amount of net gain recognized in other comprehensive income (“OCI”) on effective cash flow hedges as of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 was insignificant. The amount of gain or loss reclassified from accumulated OCI to operating expenses for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, and the amount of gain or loss) recognized in income on ineffective cash flow hedges for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 were insignificant.

As of June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the outstanding foreign currency forward contracts had a total notional value of approximately $6.3 million and $2.9 million, respectively.

Table of Contents

14. BUSINESS ACQUISITIONS

SiBEAM, Inc.

On May 16, 2011, the Company completed its acquisition of SiBEAM, Inc. (“SIBEAM”) pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) dated April 13, 2011. SiBEAM is a privately-held, fabless semiconductor company headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. and is a provider of high-speed wireless communication products for uncompressed HD video in consumer electronics and personal computer applications. The acquisition of SiBEAM supports the Company’s mission to be the leader in advanced video connectivity solutions. SiBEAM’s results of operations and the estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed were included in the Company’s unaudited consolidated financial statements beginning May 16, 2011. The revenue and net loss of SiBEAM from the period May 16, 2011 through June 30, 2011 was approximately $0.4 million and $1.8 million, respectively. Acquisition costs, which were expensed as incurred, were approximately $900,000 and $920,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

The fair value of the purchase price consideration consisted of the following (in thousands):

Cash	$	14,540
Fair value of shares of stock issued		10,429
Total purchase price	$	24,969

As part of the consideration, the Company issued 1,300,369 shares of its common stock to the former SiBEAM stockholders. The total fair value of the shares of stock issued of $10.4 million was determined based on the closing price of the Company’s stock on May 16, 2011 of $8.02 per share.

The purchase consideration was allocated to the tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed on the basis of their respective estimated fair values on the acquisition date. The Company’s allocation of the total purchase price is as follows (in thousands):

	Estimated Fair Value
Assets acquired:
Cash	$	546
Accounts receivable		564
Inventories		1,353
Other current assets		260
Fixed assets and other long-term assets		336
Intangible assets		8,500
Goodwill		18,483
Total assets acquired		30,042
Current liabilities assumed:
Accounts payable		(546	)
Accrued liabilities		(3,465	)
Line of credit		(523	)
Deferred license revenue		(417	)
Total current liabilities		(4,951	)
Deferred income tax liability, non-current		(122	)
Total liabilities assumed		(5,073	)
Total purchase price	$	24,969

The following table presents details of the intangible assets acquired through the business combination completed during the three months ended June 30, 2011 (in thousands, except years):

	Asset Life in Years		Fair Value
In-process research and development	indefinite		$	4,500
Customer relationships		5		1,000
Trademark		5		3,000
Total intangible assets			$	8,500

The Company does not believe there is any significant residual value associated with these intangible assets. The Company amortizes the intangible assets straight-line over their estimated useful lives. The Company’s management determined the fair values of the intangible assets with the assistance of a valuation firm. The estimation of the fair value of the intangible assets required the use of valuation techniques and entailed consideration of all the relevant factors that might affect the fair value, such as present value factors, estimates of future revenues and costs.

Goodwill

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the underlying net tangible and intangible assets. The goodwill recognized in this acquisition was derived from expected benefits from future technology, cost synergies and knowledgeable and experienced workforce who joined the Company after the acquisition. Goodwill will not be amortized, but will be tested instead for impairment annually or more frequently if certain indicators of impairment are present. Goodwill is not expected to be tax deductible for income tax purposes.

Table of Contents

Unaudited Pro Forma Financial Information

The unaudited pro forma financial information in the table below summarizes the combined results of operations for the Company and SiBEAM as if the merger occurred at the beginning of each of the reporting periods presented. The pro forma financial information for all periods presented also includes the business combination accounting effects resulting from this acquisition including the amortization charges from acquired intangible assets and the stock-based compensation expense recognized for equity awards granted to SiBEAM employees who joined the Company after the acquisition as though the acquisition was completed at the beginning of each reporting period presented. The pro forma financial information as presented below is for informational purposes only and is not indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved if the acquisition had taken place at the beginning of each reporting period presented.

The unaudited pro forma financial information for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 combined the historical results of the Company for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, the historical results of SiBEAM for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, and the effects of the pro forma adjustments described above.

The unaudited pro forma financial information for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 combined the historical results of the Company for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, the historical results of SiBEAM for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 and the effects of the pro forma adjustments described above.

	Three Months Ended June 30,						Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			2011			2010
	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Total revenues	$	53,777		$	45,382		$	103,501		$	80,038
Net loss	$	(5,231	)	$	(3,204	)	$	(10,184	)	$	(16,711	)
Basic and diluted loss per share	$	(0.06	)	$	(0.04	)	$	(0.13	)	$	(0.22	)

The pro forma adjustments did not have any impact on the pro forma combined provision for income taxes for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 due to net loss positions and valuation allowances on deferred income tax assets in those periods.

Anchor Bay Technology

On February 2, 2011, the Company purchased the net assets Anchor Bay Technology (“ABT’), a San Jose, California based company involved in developing certain technology that is consistent with the Company’s long-term business strategy, for a total consideration of approximately $3.6 million in cash, subject to certain contingent milestone and earn-out payments as further described below. ABT designs and manufactures video processing semiconductor and system-level solutions. ABT offers advanced video processing chips for de-interlacing and format conversion applications, and video scaling chips for Blu-Ray players, HD set-top box, and AV receiver applications.

The total fair value of the purchase consideration for this acquisition consists of the following (in thousands):

	Estimated Fair Value
Cash consideration	$	1,916
Contingent payments:
First milestone		529
Second milestone		525
Earn-out payments		427
Settlement of pre-existing arrangement		249
Total Purchase Price	$	3,646

Contingent Considerations

First milestone – The Company will pay the former stockholders of ABT $590,000 in cash upon the successful release on or before March 31, 2012 of product samples being developed by the Company which incorporate certain of ABT’s technologies. The acquisition-date fair value of the first milestone payment was approximately $529,000.

Second milestone – The Company will pay the former stockholders of ABT $590,000 in cash upon the successful release on or before November 30, 2012 of production units being developed by the Company which incorporate certain of ABT’s technologies. The acquisition-date fair value of the second milestone payment was approximately $525,000.

Earn-out Payments – The former stockholders of ABT are entitled to (i) 50% of net licensing revenue to be derived from each initial ABT IP license entered into by the Company during the first 18 months from the acquisition date and (ii) 50% of support fees collected by the Company on ABT’s IP licenses in excess of 200% of the costs of providing the support services during the first 18 months from the acquisition date. The acquisition-date fair value of the earn-out payments was approximately $427,000.

The Company had considered the acquisition-date fair values of the milestone and earn-out payments as part of the purchase price. The Company’s management determined the fair values of the contingent payments with the assistance of a valuation firm. The estimation of the fair value of the contingent payments required the use of valuation techniques and entailed consideration of all the relevant factors that might affect the fair value, such as present value factors and the probability of the achievement of the factors on which the contingency is based.

The fair values of the contingent considerations discussed above were reevaluated as of June 30, 2011 and no changes to fair values were considered necessary.

Prior to this acquisition, the Company entered into a IP License Agreement with ABT in 2010 for the use of certain of its intellectual property in exchange for a payment of $249,000, which was included in “Intangible and Other Assets” in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2010. The Company’s acquisition of ABT in February 2011 resulted in the acquisition of the IP licensed in this IP License Agreement and the effective settlement of that agreement. There was no gain or loss on such effective settlement. As a result, the payment made to ABT in connection with this IP License Agreement was considered part of the acquisition-date fair value of the total consideration transferred.

Table of Contents

The allocation of the purchase consideration of this acquisition is summarized as follows (in thousands):

	Estimated Fair Value
Intangible assets acquired	$	5,000
Goodwill		163
Net liabilities assumed		(1,517	)
Total	$	3,646

The Company allocated $163,000 of the purchase price to goodwill which is deductible for tax purposes. The goodwill recognized in this acquisition was derived from expected benefits from future technology, cost synergies and knowledgeable and experienced workforce who joined the Company after the acquisition.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 include the operations of the aforementioned acquisition, commencing on February 2, 2011, the acquisition date. No supplemental pro-forma information is presented for this acquisition due to the immaterial effect of the acquisition on the Company’s results of operations.

The following table presents details of the intangible assets acquired through the acquisition of ABT (in thousands, except years):

	Estimated Fair Value		Estimated Useful Life (In Years)
Intellectual property	$	1,600		6
Core technology		1,600		3
Trade name		600	indefinite
Customer relationships		500		2
System technology		400		3
In-process research and development		300	indefinite
Total	$	5,000

Note 15. GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Goodwill

The table below summarizes the Company's goodwill activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 (in thousands):

Carrying value at January 1, 2011	$	-
Goodwill, SiBEAM acquisition		18,483
Goodwill, ABT acquisition		163
Carrying value at June 30, 2011	$	18,646

There were no impairments to goodwill during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011.

Table of Contents

Purchased Intangible Assets

The following table presents the Company’s purchased intangible assets as of June 30, 2011 as a result of acquisitions completed during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 (in thousands):

	Estimated Fair Value		Estimated Useful Life (In Years)		Accumulated Amortization			Net
Intangible assets with finite lives:
Intellectual property	$	1,600		6	$	(111	)	$	1,489
Core technology		1,600		3		(222	)		1,378
Trademark		3,000		5		(75	)		2,925
System technology		400		3		(56	)		344
Customer relationships		1,500		2-5		(129	)		1,371
Total intangible assets with finite lives		8,100				(593	)		7,507
Intangible assets with indefinite lives:
Trade name		600	indefinite			-			600
In-process research and development		4,800	indefinite			-			4,800
Total intangible assets with indefinite lives		5,400				-			5,400
Total purchased intangible assets	$	13,500			$	(593	)	$	12,907

The Company recorded $13.5 million of purchased intangible assets as a result of the acquisitions completed during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011. For further discussion, see Note 14.

Amortization of purchased intangible assets which was presented as “Amortization of Intangible Assets” in the consolidated statements of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 was $396,000 and $593,000, respectively, and $38,000 and $75,000 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. There were no impairment charges with respect to the purchased intangible assets during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, and 2010.

The intangible asset related to the in-process research and development will be amortized over the estimated useful life of the technology upon completion of its development. After initial recognition, acquired in-process research and development assets are accounted for as indefinite-lived intangible assets. Development costs incurred after acquisition on acquired development projects are expensed as incurred. Upon completion of development, acquired in-process research and development assets are considered amortizable finite-lived assets. If the in-process research and development project is abandoned, the Company records an impairment charge in the period it is abandoned. As of June 30, 2011, the related in-process research development projects were not yet completed.

The estimated future amortization expense of purchased intangible assets with finite lives for future periods is as follows (in thousands):

Years ending December 31,	Amount
2011 (remaining 6 months)	$	992
2012		1,983
2013		1,754
2014		1,122
2015		1,067
Thereafter		589
Total	$	7,507

Note 16. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

In July 2011, the Company entered into a Class B Unit Purchase Agreement (the “Agreement”) with a third party company, which develops and designs wireless video and audio semiconductor chips. Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Company purchased 3,226,003 units of the third party company’s Class B Units for $2.329 per unit (approximately $7.5 million). The Company paid $6.5 million in July 2011 and converted a $1 million bridge loan, outstanding as of June 30, 2011, for the remainder. The Company will use the cost method of accounting for this investment.

Table of Contents

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

This report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Exchange Act and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933. These forward-looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties, including those identified in the section of this Form 10-Q entitled “Factors Affecting Future Results,” that may cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in, or implied by, such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements within this Form 10-Q are identified by words such as “believes,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “intends,” “estimates,” “may,” “will” and variations of such words and other similar expressions. However, these words are not the only means of identifying such statements. In addition, any statements that refer to expectations, projections or other characterizations of future events or circumstances are forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly release the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements that may be made to reflect events or circumstances occurring subsequent to the filing of this Form 10-Q with the SEC. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in, or implied by, forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including the risks outlined elsewhere in this report. Readers are urged to carefully review and consider the various disclosures made by Silicon Image, Inc. in this report and in our other reports filed with the SEC that attempt to advise interested parties of the risks and factors that may affect our business.

Silicon Image and the Silicon Image logo are trademarks, registered trademarks or service marks of Silicon Image, Inc. in the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

Company Overview

Silicon Image is a leading provider of advanced, interoperable connectivity solutions that enable the reliable distribution and presentation of HD content for CE, mobile, and PC markets. We deliver our technology via semiconductor and IP products that are compliant with global industry standards and also feature industry leading Silicon Image innovations such as InstaPort™. Silicon Image’s products are deployed by the leading global electronics manufacturers in devices such as desktop and notebook PCs, DTVs, Blu-Ray Disc™ players, audio-video receivers, as well as mobile phones, tablets and digital cameras. We have driven the creation of the highly successful HDMI® and DVI™ industry standards, as well as the latest standards for mobile devices - SPMT™ and MHL™. Via our wholly-owned subsidiary, Simplay Labs, LLC. Silicon Image offers manufacturers comprehensive standards interoperability and compliance testing services. Founded in 1995, we are headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, with regional engineering and sales offices in China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.

Our mission is to be the leader in advanced interoperable connectivity solutions for consumers. Our “standards plus” business strategy is to expand the available market for our products and IP solutions through the development, introduction and promotion of market leading products which are based on industry standards but also include Silicon Image innovations that our customers value. We believe that our innovation around our core competencies, establishing industry standards and building strategic relationships, positions us to continue to drive change in the emerging world of high quality digital media storage, distribution and presentation.

Our customers are product manufacturers in each of our target markets — consumer electronics, mobile, and personal computer. Because we leverage our technologies across different markets, certain of our products may be incorporated into our customers’ products used in multiple markets. We sell our products to original product manufacturers (OEMs) throughout the world using a direct sales force and through a network of distributors and manufacturer’s representatives. Our revenue is generated principally by sales of our semiconductor products, with other revenues derived from IP core/design licensing and royalty and adopter fees from our standards licensing activities. We maintain relationships with the eco-system of companies that make the products that drive digital content creation, distribution and consumption, including major Hollywood studios, service providers, consumer electronics companies and retailers. Through these and other relationships, we have formed a strong understanding of the requirements for distributing and presenting HD digital video and audio in the home and mobile environments. We have also developed a substantial IP base for building the standards and products necessary to promote opportunities for our products.

Historically, we have grown our business by introducing and promoting the adoption of new technologies and standards and entering new markets. We collaborated with other companies to jointly develop the DVI and HDMI standards. Our first products addressed the PC market. We then introduced products for a variety of CE market segments, including the set top box (STB), game console and DTV markets. This year, we began selling products in the mobile device market on the MHL standard. Most recently, we completed the acquisition of SiBEAM which supports our stated mission to be the leader in advanced video connectivity solutions and SiBEAM’s 60GHz wireless technology is expected to enable us to rapidly bring the highest quality of wirelessly transmitted HD video and audio to market.

We are a Delaware corporation headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. Our Internet website address is www.siliconimage.com.

Concentrations

Historically, a relatively small number of customers and distributors have generated a significant portion of our revenue. For instance, our top five customers, including distributors, generated 64.3% and 61.2% of our revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and 59.1% and 55.2% of our revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010. Additionally, the percentage of revenue generated through distributors tends to be material, since many OEMs rely upon third party manufacturers or distributors to provide purchasing and inventory management services. Revenue generated through distributors was 56.0% and 57.2% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and 61.8% and 54.3% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. Our licensing revenue is not generated through distributors, and to the extent licensing revenue increases faster than product revenue, we would expect a decrease in the percentage of our total revenue generated through distributors.

A significant portion of our revenue is generated from products sold overseas. Sales to customers in Asia, including distributors, represented 65.1% and 68.1% of our revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively and 66.1% and 61.2% for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. The reason for the geographical concentration in Asia is that most of our products are components of consumer electronics, computer and storage products, the majority of which are manufactured in Asia. The percentage of our revenue derived from any country is dependent upon where our end customers choose to manufacture their products. Accordingly, variability in our geographic revenue is not necessarily indicative of any geographic trends, but rather is the combined effect of new design wins and changes in customer manufacturing locations. Primarily all revenue to date has been denominated in U.S. dollars.

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported in our condensed consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. We base our estimates on historical experience and all known facts and circumstances that we believe are relevant. Actual results may differ materially from our estimates. We believe the following accounting policies to be most critical to an understanding of our financial condition and results of operations because they require us to make estimates, assumptions and judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain. Our critical accounting estimates include those regarding (1) revenue recognition, (2) inventories, (3) goodwill and intangible assets, (4) income taxes, (5) restructuring liabilities, (6) stock-based compensation expense, and (7) legal matters. For a discussion of the critical accounting estimates, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Results of Operations

REVENUE

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			Change			2011			2010			Change
	(dollars in thousands)									(dollars in thousands)
Consumer Electronics	$	19,436		$	30,028			-35.3	%	$	45,691		$	51,979			-12.1	%
Mobile		16,960			1,802			841.2	%		23,131			2,570			800.0	%
Personal Computers		5,623			6,534			-13.9	%		11,254			10,108			11.3	%
Total product revenue		42,019			38,364			9.5	%		80,076			64,657			23.8	%
Percentage of total revenue		78.5	%		86.1	%					78.1	%		82.0	%
Licensing revenue		11,534			6,186			86.5	%		22,476			14,202			58.3	%
Percentage of total revenue		21.5	%		13.9	%					21.9	%		18.0	%
Total revenue	$	53,553		$	44,550			20.2	%	$	102,552		$	78,859			30.0	%

Our consolidated total revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 increased by $9.0 million, or 20.2% and $23.7 million or 30.0%, respectively, compared to the revenue earned in the same periods in 2010. The increase in revenue during the three and six months June 30, 2011 compared to the same periods in 2010 was primarily driven by the significant revenue growth in our Mobile products and IP licensing businesses. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, Mobile revenue increased by $15.2 million and $20.6 million, respectively, compared to the Mobile revenue generated in the same periods in 2010. The significant increase in our Mobile revenue was primarily due to the successful launch of the MHL standard in the latter part of fiscal year 2010 which resulted in MHL product shipments starting in the first quarter of fiscal year 2011 and has ramped up in the second quarter. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, our licensing revenue increased by $5.3 million or 86.5% and $8.3 million or 58.3%, respectively, compared to the licensing revenue earned in the same periods in 2010. This increase was primarily due to higher HDMI royalties and new licensing deals closed during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the same periods in 2010. Our licensing activity is complementary to our product sales and helps us to monetize our intellectual property and accelerate market adoption curves associated with our technology. IP licensing continues to represent an important part of our overall business. The revenue increase in our Mobile and Licensing businesses during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the same periods in 2010 was partially offset by the $10.6 million or 35.3% and $6.3 million or 12.1% decrease in revenue from our CE market during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, compared same periods in 2010. The decrease in our CE revenue was primarily due to global macro-economic pressures that drove consumers to purchase lower priced CE products, and the 9.0 magnitude earthquake and subsequent tsunami that hit Japan in March 2011, which has affected both demand in Japan and the global supply chain for CE products. High-end DTVs with the latest features and capabilities have been particularly affected by this trend, which is the market segment where we typically deliver our latest innovations. The earthquake in Japan also had a two-fold impact. First, it reduced demand for higher-end TVs in the domestic Japanese market. Secondly, as a result of damage to their production facilities, the brands shifted a portion of their TV production to original design manufacturers (ODMs) outside of Japan who typically supply the lower-end to mid-range DTV market.

COST OF REVENUE AND GROSS PROFIT

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			Change			2011			2010			Change
	(dollars in thousands)									(dollars in thousands)
Cost of product revenue (1)	$	22,267		$	19,489			14.3	%	$	42,139		$	34,311			22.8	%
Product gross profit		19,752			18,875			4.6	%		37,937			30,346			25.0	%
Product gross profit margin		47.0	%		49.2	%					47.4	%		46.9	%

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	134		$	145					$	314		$	329

Cost of licensing revenue	$	100		$	13			669.2	%	$	500		$	36			1288.9	%
Licensing gross profit	$	11,434		$	6,173			85.2	%	$	21,976		$	14,166			55.1	%
Licensing gross profit margin		99.1	%		99.8	%					97.8	%		99.7	%

Total cost of revenue	$	22,367		$	19,502			14.7	%	$	42,639		$	34,347			24.1	%
Total gross profit	$	31,186		$	25,048			24.5	%	$	59,913		$	44,512			34.6	%
Total gross profit margin		58.2	%		56.2	%					58.4	%		56.4	%

Cost of revenue consists primarily of costs incurred to manufacture, assemble and test our products, and costs to license our technology which involves modification, customization or engineering services, as well as other overhead costs relating to the aforementioned costs, including stock-based compensation expense. Our overall gross profit, as a percentage of revenue, was 58.2% and 58.4% for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and 56.2% and 56.4% for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. Total cost of revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 increased by $2.9 million or 14.7% and $8.3 million or 24.1%, respectively, when compared to the total cost of revenue in the same periods in 2010. The increase in the total cost of revenue was primarily due to the growth in revenue volume during the same comparative periods.

Product gross profit margin for the three months ended June 30, 2011 was 2.2% lower than the product gross profit margin in the same period in 2010, from 49.2% in 2010 to 47.0% in 2011. This 2.2% decrease in product gross profit margin in the three months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 was primarily attributable to the mix of products and unfavorable variances and increase in excess and obsolescence reserves, partially offset by the increase in gross profit margin due to the wafer, testing and assembly cost savings during the three months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.

Product gross profit margin for the six months ended June 30, 2011 of 47.4% was comparable with the gross profit margin of 46.9% in the same period in 2010.

Our licensing gross profit margin for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 was 99.1% and 97.8%, respectively, compared to 99.8% and 99.7% for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. Licensing gross profit margin for the three months ended June 30, 2011 was comparable to the licensing gross profit margin in the same period in 2010. Licensing gross profit margin for the six months ended June 30, 2011 was 1.9% lower than the licensing gross profit margin for the same period in 2010 primarily due to higher mix of IP customization projects during the six months ended June 30, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010.

Table of Contents

OPERATING EXPENSES

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			Change			2011			2010			Change
	(dollars in thousands)									(dollars in thousands)
Research and development (1)	$	15,581		$	13,659			14.1	%	$	30,824		$	26,796			15.0	%
Percentage of total revenue		29.1	%		30.7	%					30.1	%		34.0	%

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	788		$	725					$	1,361		$	1,370

Research and Development (R&D). R&D expense consists primarily of employee compensation and benefits, fees for independent contractors, the cost of software tools used for designing and testing our products and costs associated with prototype materials. R&D expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 increased by $1.9 million or 14.1% and $4.0 million or 15.0%, respectively, compared to the R&D expense incurred in the same periods in 2010. The higher R&D expense in 2011 than in 2010 was primarily due to the increase in project related expenses and increase in compensation related expenses as a result of the two acquisitions that we completed during the six months ended June 30, 2011. Our R&D head count as of June 30, 2011 was 236 employees compared to 192 employees as of June 30, 2010. Refer to Note 14 to the condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I Item 1 of this report for further discussion about the two acquisitions that we completed during the six months ended June 30, 2011.

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			Change			2011			2010			Change
	(dollars in thousands)									(dollars in thousands)
Selling, general and administrative (1)	$	13,840		$	11,141			24.2	%	$	26,891		$	23,171			16.1	%
Percentage of total revenue		25.8	%		25.0	%					26.2	%		29.4	%

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense	$	1,089		$	1,115					$	2,221		$	2,446

Selling, General and Administrative (SG&A). SG&A expense consists primarily of compensation, including stock-based compensation, sales commissions, professional fees, and marketing and promotional expenses. SG&A expense during the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 increased by $2.7 million or 24.2% and $3.7 million or 16.1%, respectively, compared the SG&A expense incurred in the same periods in 2010, primarily due to the increase in compensation related expenses as well as to the transaction expenses that we incurred in relation to the two business acquisitions that we completed during the six months ended June 30, 2011. Our head count in our SG&A departments was 176 employees and 153 employees as of June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Refer to Note 14 to the condensed consolidated financial statements under Part I Item 1 of this report for further discussion about the two acquisitions that we completed during the six months ended June 30, 2011.

	Three Months Ended June 30,									Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010			Change			2011			2010			Change
	(dollars in thousands)									(dollars in thousands)
Income tax expense (benefit)	$	2,557		$	(1,203	)		-312.6	%	$	3,625		$	318			1039.9	%
Percentage of total revenue		4.8	%		-2.7	%					3.5	%		0.4	%

Provision for Income Taxes. We recorded an income tax expense of $2.6 million and $3.6 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively. The effective tax rates for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 were 201.2% and 238.6%, respectively, and were based on the Company’s projected taxable income for 2011, plus certain discrete items recorded during the quarter. The difference between the provision for income taxes and the income tax determined by applying the statutory federal income tax rate of 35% was due primarily to foreign taxes, a provision for charges in lieu of income taxes related to employee stock plans where the windfall benefit is charged to tax expense with the benefit to additional paid-in capital and state taxes.

We recorded an income tax benefit of $1.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and income tax expense of $318,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2010. The effective tax rates for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 were 210.3% and 6.2%, respectively, and were based on our projected taxable income for 2010, plus certain discrete items recorded during the quarter. The difference between the provision for income taxes and the income tax determined by applying the statutory federal income tax rate of 35% was due primarily to state taxes and foreign taxes, partially offset by a benefit of the carryback of the current year federal net operating loss adjusted for certain discrete items recorded during the quarter.

Table of Contents

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 2, “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements under Part I Item 1 of this report.

LIQUIDITY, CAPITAL RESOURCES AND FINANCIAL CONDITION

The following sections discuss the effects of changes in our balance sheet and cash flows, contractual obligations and other commitments on our liquidity and capital resources.

Cash and Cash Equivalents, Short-term Investments and Working Capital. The table below summarizes our cash and cash equivalents, investments and working capital and the related movements (in thousands).

	June 30, 2011			December 31, 2010			Change

Cash and cash equivalents	$	40,926		$	29,942		$	10,984
Short term investments		119,493			160,538			(41,045	)
Total cash, cash equivalents and short term investments	$	160,419		$	190,480		$	(30,061	)
Percentage of total assets		59.1	%		76.0	%

Total current assets	$	212,093		$	230,813			(18,720	)
Total current liabilities		(48,542	)		(46,067	)		(2,475	)
Working capital	$	163,551		$	184,746			(21,195	)

At June 30, 2011, we had $163.6 million of working capital including $160.4 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments. Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments decreased by $30.1 million from $190.5 million as of December 31, 2010 to $160.4 million as of June 30, 2011 primarily due to $15.9 million cash considerations for the two recent acquisitions that we completed during the six months ended June 30, 2011, $2.2 million cash used to satisfy certain liabilities assumed in connection with the business acquisitions previously mentioned, $7.1 million worth of loans and advances to certain third party companies and net cash used in operations during the six months ended June 30, 2011.

The significant components of our working capital are cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts receivable, inventories and prepaid expenses and other current assets, reduced by accounts payable, accrued and other current liabilities, deferred license revenue, and deferred margin on sales to distributors. Working capital at June 30, 2011 decreased by approximately $21.2 million compared to the working capital at December 31, 2010 primarily due to $18.7 million net decrease in operating assets and $2.5 million net increase in operating liabilities. The $18.7 million net decrease in operating assets was primarily due to the previously mentioned $30.1 million decrease in total cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, partially offset by $7.1 million and $4.3 million increase in accounts receivable and inventories, respectively. The increase in accounts receivable was primarily due to the increase in billings over collections during the six months ended June 30, 2011. The increase in inventories was mainly due to inventories acquired from acquisition of approximately $1.4 million and inventory build-up in preparation for the third quarter shipments. The $2.5 million increase in operating liabilities was mainly due to $1.9 million and $1.6 million increase in accrued and other current liabilities and accounts payable, respectively, partially offset by $1.1 million decrease in deferred license revenue. The increase in accounts payable was primarily due to increase in inventories and accounts payable assumed from business acquisitions. The increase in accrued and other current liabilities was mainly due to accrued liabilities assumed from business acquisitions. The decrease in deferred license revenue was primarily because of revenue recognized during the six months ended June 30, 2011.

We believe that our current cash, cash equivalents and short-term investment balances will be sufficient to meet our liquidity requirements for at least the next twelve months.

Table of Contents

Summary of Cash Flows. The table below summarizes the cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) in our operating, investing and financing activities (in thousands).

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2011			2010

Cash provided by (used in) operating activities	$	(5,693	)	$	21,559
Cash provided by (used in) investing activities		12,917			(31,606	)
Cash provided by financing activities		3,803			142
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		(43	)		270
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	$	10,984		$	(9,635	)

During the six months ended June 30, 2011, cash and cash equivalents increased by approximately $11.0 million primarily because of the cash generated from our investing and financing activities of $12.9 million and $3.8 million, respectively, partially offset by $5.7 million cash used in our operating activities.

Operating Activities

The $5.7 million cash used in our operating activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was primarily due to the increase in operating assets, such as accounts receivable and inventories.

The increase in accounts receivable was primarily due to the increase in billings over collections during the six months ended June 30, 2011. The increase in inventories was mainly due to inventory build-up in preparation for the third quarter shipments.

Investing Activities

The $12.9 million cash generated from our investing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was due primarily to $39.7 million net proceeds from the sale of short-term investments, partially offset by $23.0 million cash used in connection with financing our business acquisitions and other business strategic initiatives and $3.7 million net investment in property and equipment. During the six months ended June 30, 2011, we sold $109.7 million and purchased $70.0 million worth of short-term investments.

We held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. We are not a capital-intensive business. Our purchases of property and equipment relate mainly to testing equipment, leasehold improvements and information technology infrastructure.

Financing Activities

The $3.8 million cash generated from our financing activities during the six months ended June 30, 2011 was primarily due to the proceeds from issuances of common stock of approximately $4.4 million and to the excess tax benefits from employee stock-based transactions of approximately $1.4 million, partially offset by $1.5 million cash used to repurchase restricted stock units for minimum statutory income tax withholding and $0.5 million cash used to pay a line of credit assumed from business acquisition.

Commitments and Contractual Obligations

Our principal commitments primarily consist of obligations outstanding under operating leases and other contractual obligations.

Our contractual obligations under operating leases primarily relate to our leased facilities under our non-cancelable operating leases. The majority of our office space is located in United States, including our corporate headquarters in Sunnyvale, California. Our longest lease expires in June 2018.

Our future operating lease commitments at June 30, 2011 were as follows (in thousands):

		Total				2011				2012				2013				2014				2015				Thereafter
Operating lease obligations		$	11,673			$	1,862			$	1,759			$	1,414			$	1,471			$	1,599			$	3,568

As of June 30, 2011, we are committed to make payment relating to a certain engineering services agreement of approximately $1.1 million in the third quarter of fiscal year 2011.

We purchase components from a variety of suppliers and use several contract manufacturers to provide manufacturing services for our products. During the normal course of business, in order to manage manufacturing lead times and help ensure adequate component supply, we enter into agreements with contract manufacturers and suppliers that either allow them to procure inventory based upon criteria as defined by us or that establish the parameters defining our requirements. In certain instances, these agreements allow us the option to cancel, reschedule, and adjust our requirements based on our business needs prior to firm orders being placed. Consequently, only a portion of our reported purchase commitments arising from these agreements are firm, non-cancelable, and unconditional commitments.

Liquidity and Capital Resource Requirements

In July 2011, we utilized approximately $6.5 million of our cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments in connection with our investment in the equity of a third party company. Based on our estimated cash flows, we believe our existing cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments are sufficient to meet our capital and operating requirements for at least the next 12 months. Our future operating and capital requirements depend on many factors, including the levels at which we generate product revenue and related margins, the extent to which we generate cash through stock option exercises and proceeds from sales of shares under our employee stock purchase plan, the timing and extent of development, licensing and royalty revenue, investments in inventory and accounts receivable, the cost of securing access to adequate manufacturing capacity, our operating expenses, including legal and patent assertion costs, and general economic conditions. In addition, cash may be required for future acquisitions should we choose to pursue any. To the extent existing resources and cash from operations are insufficient to support our activities; we may need to raise additional funds through public or private equity or debt financing. These funds may not be available, or if available, we may not be able to obtain them on terms favorable to us.

Table of Contents

Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Interest Rate Risk

The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing the income we receive from our investments without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term investments in a variety of securities, including government and corporate securities and money market funds. These securities are classified as available for sale and consequently are recorded on the balance sheet at fair value with unrealized gains or losses reported as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). We also limit our exposure to interest rate and credit risk by establishing and monitoring clear policies and guidelines of our fixed income portfolios. The guidelines also establish credit quality standards, limits on exposure to any one issuer and limits on exposure to the type of instrument. Due to the limited duration and credit risk criteria established in our guidelines we do not expect the exposure to interest rate risk and credit risk to be material. If interest rates rise, the market value of our investments may decline, which could result in a realized loss if we are forced to sell an investment before its scheduled maturity. As of June 30, 2011, we had an investment portfolio of securities as reported in short-term investments of approximately $119.5 million. A sensitivity analysis was performed on our investment portfolio as of June 30, 2011. This sensitivity analysis was based on a modeling technique that measures the hypothetical market value changes that would result from a parallel shift in the yield curve of plus 50, 100, or 150 basis points over a twelve-month time horizon.

	0.5%				1.0%				1.5%
	$ 499,000				$ 999,000				$ 1,498,000

As of December 31, 2010, we had an investment portfolio of securities as reported in short-term investments $160.5 million. A sensitivity analysis was performed on our investment portfolio as of December 31, 2010. This sensitivity analysis was based on a modeling technique that measures the hypothetical market value changes that would result from a parallel shift in the yield curve of plus 50, 100, or 150 basis points over a twelve-month time horizon.

The following represents the potential change to the value of our investments given a shift in the yield curve used in our sensitivity analysis.

	0.5%				1.0%				1.5%
	$ 656,000				$ 1,313,000				$ 1,969,000

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to significant concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents and short-term investments and accounts receivable. A majority of our cash and investments are maintained with a major financial institutions headquartered in the United States. As part of our cash and investment management processes, we perform periodic evaluations of the credit standing of the financial institutions and we have not sustained any credit losses from investments held at these financial institutions. The counterparties to the agreements relating to our investment securities consist of various major corporations and financial institutions of high credit standing.

We perform on-going credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition and may require collateral, such as letters of credit, to secure accounts receivable if deemed necessary. We maintain an allowance for potentially uncollectible accounts receivable based on our assessment of collectability.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

A majority of our revenue, expense, and capital purchasing activities are transacted in U.S. dollars. However, certain operating expenditures and capital purchases are incurred in or exposed to other currencies, primarily the Chinese Yuan and Japanese Yen. . Additionally, many of our foreign distributors price our products in the local currency of the countries in which they sell. Therefore, significant strengthening or weakening of the U.S. dollar relative to those foreign currencies could result in reduced demand or lower U.S. dollar prices or vice versa, for our products, which would negatively affect our operating results. Cash balances held in foreign countries are subject to local banking laws and may bear higher or lower risk than cash deposited in the United States. The following represents the potential impact of a change in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the foreign currencies which we use in our operations. The following represents the potential impact on our cash flows of a change in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the Chinese Yuan, Japanese Yen, Euro, British Pound, Taiwan Dollar and Korean Won for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010. This sensitivity analysis aggregates our activity in these currencies for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, translated to U.S. dollars, and applies a change in the U.S. dollar value of 5%, 7.5% and 10% (in thousands).

	June 30, 2011		June 30, 2010		June 30, 2011			June 30, 2010		June 30, 2011		June 30, 2010
		5%		5%		7.5%	%		7.5%		10%		10%
China	$	246	$	149	$	369		$	224	$	492	$	298
Japan		139		70		209			106		278		141
Germany		-		444		-			667		-		889
Others		93		73		140			109		187		146
Total	$	478	$	736	$	718		$	1,106	$	957	$	1,474

Table of Contents

Derivative Instruments

We have operations in the United States, Europe and Asia, however, a majority of our revenue, costs of sales, expense and capital purchasing activities are being transacted in U.S. Dollars. As a corporation with international as well as domestic operations, we are exposed to changes in foreign exchange rates. These exposures may change over time and could have a material adverse impact on our financial results. Periodically, we use foreign currency forward contracts to hedge certain forecasted foreign currency transactions relating to operating expenses. We do not enter into derivatives for speculative or trading purposes. We use derivative instruments primarily to manage exposures to foreign currency fluctuations on forecasted cash flows and balances primarily denominated in Euro. Our primary objective in holding derivatives is to reduce the volatility of earnings and cash flows associated with changes in foreign currency exchange rates. These derivatives are designated as cash flow hedges and have maturities of less than one year. The effective portion of the derivative’s gain or loss is initially reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income and, upon occurrence of the forecasted transaction, is subsequently reclassified into the line item in the consolidated statements of operations to which the hedged transaction relates. We record any ineffectiveness of the hedging instruments in other income (expense) on our consolidated statements of operations.

Our derivatives expose us to credit and non performance risks to the extent that the counterparties may be unable to meet the terms of the agreement. We seek to mitigate such risks by limiting the counterparties to major financial institutions. In addition, the potential risk of loss with any one counterparty resulting from this type of credit risk is monitored. Management does not expect material losses as a result of defaults by counterparties.

As of June 30, 2011, the outstanding foreign exchange contracts had a total notional value of $6.3 million. See Note 13 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for more detailed discussions on derivative transactions.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Based on our management’s evaluation (with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer), as of the end of the period covered by this report, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”)) are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms and is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There was no change in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during our second quarter of fiscal 2011 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Part II. Other Information

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

Please refer to Note 9 to our financial statements under Part I Item 1 financials statements.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

A description of the risk factors associated with our business is set forth below. You should carefully consider the following risk factors, together with all other information contained or incorporated by reference in this filing, before you decide to purchase shares of our common stock. These factors could cause our future results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by forward-looking statements made by us. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also harm our business. The trading price of our common stock could decline due to any of these risks and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Our success depends on demand for our new products.

Our future growth and success depends on our ability to develop and bring to market - on a timely basis - new products, such as those supporting the new Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL) standard. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in developing and marketing these new or other future products. Moreover, there is no assurance that our new or future products will achieve the desired level of market acceptance in the anticipated timeframes or that any such new or future products will contribute significantly to our revenue. Our new products face significant competition from established companies that have been selling competitive products for longer periods of time than we have. Our inability to develop and market new products could negatively affect our business and results of operations.

Table of Contents

Our success depends on the development and introduction of new products, which we may not be able to do in a timely manner because the process of developing high-performance semiconductor products is complex and costly.

The development of new products is highly complex, and we have experienced delays, some of which exceeded one year, in the development and introduction of new products on several occasions in the past. We have recently introduced new products and will continue to introduce new products in the future. As our products integrate new, more advanced functions, they become more complex and increasingly difficult to design, manufacture and debug. Successful product development and introduction depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited to:

·	accurate prediction of market trends and requirements, the establishment and adoption of new standards in the market and the evolution of existing standards, including enhancements or modifications to existing standards such as HDMI, MHL, SPMT, and WirelessHD;
·	identification of customer and consumer market needs where we can apply our innovation and skills to create new standards or areas for product differentiation that improve our overall competitiveness either in an existing market or in a new market;
·	development of advanced technologies and capabilities and new products that satisfy customer and market requirements;
·	competitors’ and customers’ integration of the functionality of our products into their products, which puts pressure on us to continue to develop and introduce new products with new functionality;
·	timely completion and introduction of new product designs; correctly anticipating the market windows that will maximize acceptance of our products and then delivering the products to the markets within the required time frames;
·	management of product life cycles;
·	use of leading-edge foundry processes, when use of such processes is required and achievement of high manufacturing yields and low cost testing;
·	market acceptance of our new products;
·	consumer preferences for how they purchase and consume HD video are rapidly changing and our products may not be able to meet shifting consumer preferences; and
·	market acceptance of new architectures such as our input processors.

Accomplishing all of this is extremely challenging, time-consuming and expensive and there is no assurance that we will succeed. Product development delays may result from unanticipated engineering complexities, changing market or competitive product requirements or specifications, difficulties in overcoming resource constraints, the inability to license third-party technology or other factors. Competitors and customers may integrate the functionality of our products into their own products, thereby reducing demand for our products. If we are not able to develop and introduce our products successfully and in a timely manner, our costs could increase or our revenue could decrease, both of which would adversely affect our operating results. In addition, it is possible that we may experience delays in generating revenue from these products or that we may never generate revenue from these products. We must work with a semiconductor foundry and with potential customers to complete new product development and to validate manufacturing methods and processes to support volume production and potential re-work. Each of these steps may involve unanticipated difficulties, which could delay product introduction and reduce market acceptance of the product. In addition, these difficulties and the increasing complexity of our products may result in the introduction of products that contain defects or that do not perform as expected, which would harm our relationships with customers and our ability to achieve market acceptance of our new products. There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve design wins for our planned new products, that we will be able to complete development of these products when anticipated, or that these products can be manufactured in commercial volumes at acceptable yields, or that any design wins will produce any revenue. Failure to develop and introduce new products, successfully and in a timely manner, may adversely affect our results of operations.

Our annual and quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly and are difficult to predict, particularly given adverse domestic and global economic conditions.

Our annual and quarterly operating results are likely to vary significantly in the future based on a number of factors many of which we have little or no control. These factors include, but are not limited to:

·	the growth, evolution and rate of adoption of industry standards for our key markets, including consumer electronics, mobile and PC.
·	our licensing revenue is heavily dependent on a few key licensing transactions being completed for any given period, the timing of which is not always predictable and is especially susceptible to delay beyond the period in which completion is expected and our concentrated dependence on a few licensees in any period for substantial portions of our expected licensing revenue and profits;
·	our licensing revenue has been uneven and unpredictable over time and is expected to continue to be uneven and unpredictable for the foreseeable future, resulting in considerable fluctuation in the amount of revenue recognized in a particular quarter;
·	the impact of the results of the royalty compliance audits which we regularly perform;
·	competitive pressures, such as the ability of competitors to successfully introduce products that are more cost-effective or that offer greater functionality than our products, including integration into their products of functionality offered by our products, the prices set by competitors for their products and the potential for alliances, combinations, mergers and acquisitions among our competitors;
·	average selling prices of our products, which are influenced by competition and technological advancements, among other factors;
·	government regulations regarding the timing and extent to which digital content must be made available to consumers;
·	the availability of other semiconductors or other key components that are required to produce a complete solution for the customer; usually, we supply one of many necessary components;
·	the cost of components for our products, including the cost of gold, and prices charged by the third parties who manufacture, assemble and test our products; and
·	fluctuations in market demand, one-time sales opportunities and sales goals, sometimes result in heightened sales efforts during a given period that may adversely affect our sales in future periods.

Because we have little or no control over these factors and/or their magnitude, our operating results are difficult to predict. Any substantial adverse change in any of these factors could negatively affect our business and results of operations.

Table of Contents

Our annual and quarterly operating results are highly dependent upon how well we manage our business.

Our annual and quarterly operating results are highly dependent upon and may fluctuate based on how well we manage our business. Some of these factors include the following:

·	our ability to manage product introductions and transitions, develop necessary sales and marketing channels and manage other matters necessary to enter new market segments;
·	our ability to successfully manage our business in multiple markets such as CE, PC and mobile, which may involve additional research and development, marketing or other costs and expenses;
·	our ability to enter into licensing deals when expected and make timely deliverables and milestones on which recognition of revenue often depends;
·	our ability to engineer customer solutions that adhere to industry standards in a timely and cost-effective manner;
·	our ability to achieve acceptable manufacturing yields and develop automated test programs within a reasonable time frame for our new products;
·	our ability to manage joint ventures and projects, design services and our supply chain partners;
·	our ability to monitor the activities of our licensees to ensure compliance with license restrictions and remittance of royalties;
·	our ability to structure our organization to enable achievement of our operating objectives and to meet the needs of our customers and markets;
·	the success of the distribution and partner channels through which we choose to sell our products and our ability to manage expenses and inventory levels; and
·	our ability to successfully maintain certain structural and various compliance activities in support of our global structure which is designed to result in certain operational benefits as well as an overall lower tax rate and which, if not maintained, may result in us losing these operational and tax benefits.

If we fail to effectively manage our business, this could adversely affect our results of operations.

Our business has been and may continue to be significantly impacted by deterioration in worldwide economic conditions and uncertainty in the outlook for the global economy makes it more likely that our actual results will differ materially from expectations.

Global credit and financial markets have experienced disruptions, and may continue to experience disruptions in the future, including diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates, and continued uncertainty about economic stability. Despite signs of improvement, there can be no assurance that there will not be renewed deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions. These economic uncertainties affect businesses such as ours in a number of ways, making it difficult to accurately forecast and plan our future business activities. The continued or further tightening of credit in financial markets may lead consumers and businesses to postpone spending, which may cause our customers to cancel, decrease or delay their existing and future orders with us. In addition, financial difficulties experienced by our suppliers or distributors could result in product delays, increased accounts receivable defaults and inventory challenges. The volatility in the credit markets has severely diminished liquidity and capital availability. Our CE product revenue, which comprised approximately 46.3% and 57.1% of total product revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively, and approximately 78.3% and 80.4% of total product revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively, is dependent on continued demand for consumer electronics, including but not limited to, DTVs, STBs, DVDs and game consoles. Demand for consumer electronics business is a function of the health of the economies in the United States and around the world. As a result of the recent recession experienced by the US economy and other economies around the world, the demand for overall consumer electronics has been and may continue to be adversely affected. As a result, the demand for our CE, Mobile and PC products and our operating results has been and may continue to be adversely affected as well. We cannot predict the timing, strength or duration of any economic disruption or subsequent economic recovery, worldwide, in the United States, in our industry, or in the consumer electronics market. These and other economic factors have had and may continue to have a material adverse effect on demand for our CE, Mobile and PC products and on our financial condition and operating results.

Investments in both fixed rate and floating rate interest earning instruments carry a degree of interest rate risk. Fixed rate debt securities may have their market value adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates, while floating rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates fall. Due in part to these factors, our future investment income may fall short of expectations due to changes in interest rates. We may suffer losses in principal if we are forced to sell securities that decline in market value due to changes in interest rates. Recent adverse events in the global economy and in the credit markets could negatively impact our return on investment for these debt securities and thereby reduce the amount of cash and cash equivalents and investments on our balance sheet.

The licensing component of our business strategy increases business risk and volatility.

Part of our business strategy is to license IP through agreements with companies whereby companies incorporate our IP into their respective technologies that address markets in which we do not want to directly participate. There can be no assurance that additional companies will be interested in licensing our technology on commercially favorable terms or at all. We also cannot ensure that companies who license our technology will introduce and sell products incorporating our technology, will accurately report royalties owed to us, will pay agreed upon royalties, will honor agreed upon market restrictions, will not infringe upon or misappropriate our intellectual property and will maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary information. The IP agreements are complex and depend upon many factors including completion of milestones, allocation of values to delivered items and customer acceptances. Many of these factors require significant judgments. Licensing revenue could fluctuate significantly from period to period because it is heavily dependent on a few key deals being completed in a particular period, the timing of which is difficult to predict and may not match our expectations. Because of its high margin, the licensing revenue portion of our overall revenue can have a disproportionate impact on gross profit and profitability. Also, generating revenue from these arrangements is a lengthy and complex process that may last beyond the period in which efforts begin and, once an agreement is in place, the timing of revenue recognition may be dependent on customer acceptance of deliverables, achievement of milestones, our ability to track and report progress on contracts, customer commercialization of the licensed technology and other factors. Licensing that occurs in connection with actual or contemplated litigation is subject to risk that the adversarial nature of the transaction will induce non-compliance or non-payment. The accounting rules associated with recognizing revenue from these transactions are increasingly complex and subject to interpretation. Due to these factors, the amount of license revenue recognized in any period may differ significantly from our expectations.

Table of Contents

We face intense competition in our markets, which may lead to reduced revenue from sales of our products and increased losses.

The CE, Mobile and PC markets in which we operate are intensely competitive. These markets are characterized by rapid technological change, evolving standards, short product life cycles and declining selling prices. We expect competition for many of our products to increase, as industry standards become widely adopted, as competitors reduce prices and offer products with greater levels of integration, and as new competitors enter our markets.

Our products face competition from companies selling similar discrete products and from companies selling products such as chipsets and system-on-a-chip (SoC) solutions with integrated functionality. Our competitors include semiconductor companies that focus on the CE, Mobile and PC markets, as well as major diversified semiconductor companies and we expect that new competitors will enter our markets. Current or potential customers, including our own licensees, may also develop solutions that could compete with us, including solutions that integrate the functionality of our products into their solutions. In addition, current or potential OEM customers may have internal semiconductor capabilities and may develop their own solutions for use in their products rather than purchasing them from companies such as us. Some of our competitors have already established supplier or joint development relationships with current or potential customers and may be able to leverage their existing relationships to discourage these customers from purchasing products from us or persuade them to replace our products with theirs. Many of our competitors have longer operating histories, greater presence in key markets, better name recognition, access to larger customer bases and significantly greater financial, sales and marketing, manufacturing, distribution, technical and other resources than we do and as a result, they may be able to adapt more quickly to new or emerging technologies and customer requirements, or devote greater resources to the promotion and sale of their products. In particular, well-established semiconductor companies, such as Analog Devices, NXP, Broadcom, Intel, National Semiconductor and Texas Instruments and CE manufacturers, such as Panasonic, Sony, Samsung and Toshiba, may compete against us in the future. Some of our competitors could merge, which may enhance their market presence. Existing or new competitors may also develop technologies that more effectively address our markets with products that offer enhanced features and functionality, lower power requirements, greater levels of integration or lower cost. Increased competition has resulted in and is likely to continue to result in price reductions and loss of market share in certain markets. We cannot assure you that we can compete successfully against current or potential competitors, or that competition will not reduce our revenue and gross margins.

We operate in rapidly evolving markets, which makes it difficult to evaluate our future prospects.

The markets in which we compete are characterized by rapid technological change, evolving customer needs and frequent introductions of new products and standards. As we adjust to evolving customer requirements and technological advances, we may be required to further reposition our existing offerings and to introduce new products and services. We may not be successful in developing and marketing such new offerings, or we may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the development and marketing of such new offerings. Moreover, new standards that compete with standards that we promote have been and in the future may be introduced from time to time, which could impact our success. Accordingly, we face risks and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in new and rapidly evolving markets. If we do not successfully address these risks and difficulties, our results of operations could be negatively affected.

We may experience difficulties in transitioning to smaller geometry process technologies or in achieving higher levels of design integration, which may result in reduced manufacturing yields, delays in product deliveries and increased expenses.

To remain competitive, we expect to continue to transition our semiconductor products to increasingly smaller line width geometries. This transition requires us to modify the manufacturing processes for our products and to redesign some products as well as standard cells and other integrated circuit designs that we may use in multiple products. We periodically evaluate the benefits, on a product-by-product basis, of migrating to smaller geometry process technologies to reduce our costs. Currently most of our products are manufactured in .18 micron and .13 micron, geometry processes. We are now designing a new product in 65 nanometer process technology and planning for the transition to smaller process geometries. In the past, we have experienced some difficulties in shifting to smaller geometry process technologies or new manufacturing processes, which resulted in reduced manufacturing yields, delays in product deliveries and increased expenses. The transition to 65 nanometer geometry process technology will result in significantly higher mask and prototyping costs, as well as additional expenditures for engineering design tools and related computer hardware. We may face similar difficulties, delays and expenses as we continue to transition our products to smaller geometry processes.

We are dependent on our relationships with our foundry subcontractor to transition to smaller geometry processes successfully. We cannot assure you that the foundries that we use will be able to effectively manage the transition in a timely manner, or at all, or that we will be able to maintain our existing foundry relationships or develop new ones. If any of our foundry subcontractors or we experience significant delays in this transition or fail to efficiently implement this transition, we could experience reduced manufacturing yields, delays in product deliveries and increased expenses, all of which could harm our relationships with our customers and our results of operations.

We will have difficulty selling our products if customers do not design our products into their product offerings or if our customers’ product offerings are not commercially successful.

Our products are generally incorporated into our customers’ products at the customers’ design stage. As a result, we rely on manufacturers to select our products to be designed into their products. Without these “design wins,” it is very difficult to sell our products. We often incur significant expenditures on the development of a new product without any assurance that a manufacturer will select our product for design into its own product. Additionally, in some instances, we are dependent on third parties to obtain or provide information that we need to achieve a design win. Some of these third parties may be our competitors and, accordingly, may not supply this information to us on a timely basis, if at all. Once a manufacturer designs a competitor’s product into its product offering, it becomes significantly more difficult for us to sell our products to that customer because changing suppliers involves significant cost, time, effort and risk for the customer. Furthermore, even if a manufacturer designs one of our products into its product offering, we cannot be assured that its product will be commercially successful or that we will receive any revenue from that product. Sales of our products largely depend on the commercial success of our customers’ products. Our customers generally can choose at any time to stop using our products if their own products are not commercially successful or for any other reason. We cannot assure you that we will continue to achieve design wins or that our customers’ equipment incorporating our products will ever be commercially successful.

Table of Contents

Our products typically have lengthy sales cycles. A customer may decide to cancel or change its product plans, which could cause us to lose anticipated sales. In addition, our average product life cycles tend to be short and, as a result, we may hold excess or obsolete inventory that could adversely affect our operating results.

After we have developed and delivered a product to a customer, the customer will usually test and evaluate our product prior to designing its own equipment to incorporate our product. Our customers generally need three months to over six months to test, evaluate and adopt our product and an additional three months to over nine months to begin volume production of products that incorporate our products. Due to this lengthy sales cycle, we may experience significant delays from the time we incur operating expenses and make investments in inventory until the time that we generate revenue from these products. It is possible that we may never generate any revenue from these products after incurring such expenditures. Even if a customer selects our product to incorporate into its products, we have no assurances that the customer will ultimately market and sell its products or that such efforts by our customer will be successful. The delays inherent in our lengthy sales cycle increase the risk that a customer will decide to cancel or change its product plans. Such a cancellation or change in plans by a customer could cause us to lose sales that we had anticipated. In addition, anticipated sales could be materially and adversely affected if a significant customer curtails, reduces or delays orders during our sales cycle or chooses not to release equipment that contains our products. Further, the combination of our lengthy sales cycles coupled with worldwide economic conditions could have a compounding negative impact on the results of our operations.

While our sales cycles are typically long, our average product life cycles tend to be short as a result of the rapidly changing technology environment in which we operate. As a result, the resources devoted to product sales and marketing may not generate material revenue for us and from time to time, we may need to write off excess and obsolete inventory. If we incur significant marketing expenses and investments in inventory in the future that if we are not able to recover and we are not able to compensate for those expenses, our operating results could be adversely affected. In addition, if we sell our products at reduced prices in anticipation of cost reductions but still hold higher cost products in inventory, our operating results would be harmed.

Our customers may not purchase anticipated levels of products, which can result in excess inventories.

We generally do not obtain firm, long-term purchase commitments from our customers and, in order to accommodate the requirements of certain customers, we may from time to time build inventory that is specific to that customer in advance of receiving firm purchase orders. The short-term nature of our customers’ commitments and the rapid changes in demand for their products reduce our ability to accurately estimate the future requirements of those customers. Should the customer’s need shift so that they no longer require such inventory, we may be left with excessive inventories, which could adversely affect our operating results.

We depend on a few key customers and the loss of any of them could significantly reduce our revenue.

Historically, a relatively small number of customers and distributors have generated a significant portion of our revenue. For the three months ended June 30, 2011, shipments to Edom Technology Co., Ltd, Samsung Electronics and Weikeng Industrial Co., Ltd. accounted for 20.5%, 20.3% and 11.7% of our revenue, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2011, shipments to Samsung Electronics, Edom Technology Co., Ltd. and Weikeng Industrial Co., Ltd. accounted for 16.9%, 15.7% and 11.2% of our revenue, respectively. For the three months ended June 30, 2010, shipments to Samsung Electronics, Innotech Corporation and Microtek Corporation accounted for 16.2%, 12.5% and 11.4% of our revenue, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2010, shipments to Samsung Electronics and Innotech Corporation accounted for 17.7% and 11.2% of our revenue, respectively. In addition, an end-customer may buy our products through multiple distributors, contract manufacturers and /or directly, which could create an even greater concentration. We cannot be certain that customers and key distributors that have accounted for significant revenue in past periods, individually or as a group, will continue to sell our products and generate revenue. As a result of this concentration of our customers, our results of operations could be negatively affected if any of the following occurs:

·	one or more of our customers, including distributors, becomes insolvent or goes out of business;
·	one or more of our key customers or distributors significantly reduces, delays or cancels orders; and/or
·	one or more significant customers selects products manufactured by one of our competitors for inclusion in their future product generations.

While our participation in multiple markets has broadened our customer base, as product mix fluctuates from quarter to quarter, we may become more dependent on a small number of customers or a single customer for a significant portion of our revenue in a particular quarter, the loss of which could adversely affect our operating results.

We sell our products through distributors, which limits our direct interaction with our end customers, therefore reducing our ability to forecast sales and increasing the complexity of our business.

Many original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) rely on third-party manufacturers or distributors to provide inventory management and purchasing functions. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, distributors accounted for 56.0% and 57.2% of our revenue, respectively. Sales to distributors accounted for 61.8% and 54.3% of our revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. Selling through distributors reduces our ability to forecast sales and increases the complexity of our business, requiring us to:

·	manage a more complex supply chain;
·	monitor and manage the level of inventory of our products at each distributor;
· ·	estimate the impact of credits, return rights, price protection and unsold inventory at distributors; and monitor the financial condition and credit-worthiness of our distributors, many of which are located outside of the United States and the majority of which are not publicly traded.

Since we have limited ability to forecast inventory levels at our end customers, it is possible that there may be significant build-up of inventories in the distributor channel, with the OEM or the OEM’s contract manufacturer. Such a buildup could result in a slowdown in orders, requests for returns from customers, or requests to move out planned shipments. This could adversely impact our revenues and profits.

Any failure to manage these challenges could disrupt or reduce sales of our products and unfavorably impact our financial results.

Table of Contents

Governmental action against companies located in offshore jurisdictions may lead to a reduction in the demand for our common shares.

Recent federal and state legislation has been proposed, and additional legislation may be proposed in the future which, if enacted, could have an adverse tax impact on both us and our stockholders. For example, the ability to defer taxes as a result of permanent investments offshore could be limited, thus raising our effective tax rate.

We have made acquisitions in the past and may make acquisitions in the future, and these acquisitions involve numerous risks.

Our growth depends upon market growth and our ability to enhance our existing products and introduce new products on a timely basis. Acquisition of companies or intangible assets is a strategy we may use to develop new products and enter new markets. We may acquire additional companies or technologies in the future. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including, but not limited to, the following:

·	difficulty and increased costs in assimilating employees, including our possible inability to keep and retain key employees of the acquired business;
·	disruption of our ongoing business;
·	discovery of undisclosed liabilities of the acquired companies and legal disputes with founders or stockholders of acquired companies;
·	inability to commercialize acquired technology; and
·	the need to take impairment charges or write-downs with respect to acquired assets.

No assurance can be given that our prior acquisitions or our future acquisitions, if any, will be successful or provide the anticipated benefits, or that they will not adversely affect our business, operating results or financial condition. Failure to manage growth effectively and to successfully integrate acquisitions made by us could materially harm our business and operating results.

For example, in January 2007, we completed the acquisition of sci-worx, now Silicon Image, GmbH. In 2009, because of our decision to focus on discrete semiconductor products and related intellectual property, we decided to restructure our research and development operations resulting in the closure of our two sites in Germany. We acquired Anchor Bay Technologies in February 2011 and SiBEAM, Inc. in May 2011. There is a risk that integration difficulties may cause us not to realize expected benefits from these strategic transactions. The success of the acquisitions could depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings (if any) from combining the businesses of the acquired companies and our business, which may take longer to realize than expected.

Industry cycles may strain our management and resources.

Cycles of growth and contraction in our industry may strain our management and resources. To manage these industry cycles effectively, we must:

·	improve operational and financial systems;
·	train and manage our employee base;
·	successfully integrate operations and employees of businesses we acquire or have acquired;
·	attract, develop, motivate and retain qualified personnel with relevant experience; and

If we cannot manage industry cycles effectively, our business could be seriously harmed.

The cyclical nature of the semiconductor industry may create constrictions in our foundry, test and assembly capacity.

The semiconductor industry is characterized by significant downturns and wide fluctuations in supply and demand. This cyclicality has led to significant fluctuations in product demand and in the foundry, test and assembly capacity of third-party suppliers. Production capacity for fabricated semiconductors is subject to allocation, whereby not all of our production requirements would be met. This may impact our ability to meet demand and could also increase our production costs and inventory levels. Cyclicality has also accelerated decreases in average selling prices per unit. We may experience fluctuations in our future financial results because of changes in industry-wide conditions. Our financial performance has been and may in the future be, negatively impacted by downturns in the semiconductor industry. In a downturn situation, we may incur substantial losses if there is excess production capacity or excess inventory levels in the distribution channel.

We depend on third-party sub-contractors to manufacture, assemble and test nearly all of our products, which reduce our control over the production process.

We do not own or operate a semiconductor fabrication facility. We rely on one third party semiconductor foundry overseas to produce substantially all of our semiconductor products. We also rely on outside assembly and test services to test all of our semiconductor products. Our reliance on independent foundries, assembly and test facilities involves a number of significant risks, including, but not limited to:

·	reduced control over delivery schedules, quality assurance, manufacturing yields and production costs;
·	lack of guaranteed production capacity or product supply, potentially resulting in higher inventory levels; and
·	lack of availability of, or delayed access to, next-generation or key process technologies.

Table of Contents

We do not have a long-term supply agreement with any of our subcontractors and instead obtain production services on a purchase order basis. Our outside sub-contractors have no obligation to manufacture our products or supply products to us for any specific period of time, in any specific quantity or at any specific price, except as set forth in a particular purchase order. Our requirements represent a small portion of the total production capacity of our outside foundry, assembly and test facilities and our sub-contractors may reallocate capacity on short notice to other customers who may be larger and better financed than we are, or who have long-term agreements with our sub-contractors, even during periods of high demand for our products. This foundry may allocate or move production of our products to different foundries under their control, even in different locations, which may be time consuming, costly and difficult, have an adverse affect on quality, yields and costs and require us and/or our customers to re-qualify the products, which could open up design wins to competition and result in the loss of design wins and design-ins. If our subcontractors are unable or unwilling to continue manufacturing our products in the required volumes, at acceptable quality, yields and costs and in a timely manner, our business will be substantially harmed. As a result, we would have to identify and qualify substitute sub-contractors, which would be time-consuming, costly and difficult; there is no guarantee that we would be able to identify and qualify such substitute sub-contractors on a timely basis or obtain commercially reasonable terms from them. This qualification process may also require significant effort by our customers and may lead to re-qualification of parts, opening up design wins to competition and loss of design wins and design-ins. Any of these circumstances could substantially harm our business. In addition, if competition for foundry, assembly and test capacity increases, our product costs may increase and we may be required to pay significant amounts or make significant purchase commitments to secure access to production services.

The complex nature of our production process, which can reduce yields and prevent identification of problems until well into the production cycle or, in some cases, after the product has been shipped.

The manufacture of semiconductors is a complex process and it is often difficult for semiconductor foundries to achieve acceptable product yields. Product yields depend on both our product design and the manufacturing process technology unique to the semiconductor foundry. Since low yields may result from either design or process difficulties, identifying problems can often only occur well into the production cycle, when an actual product exists that can be analyzed and tested.

Further, we only test our products after they are assembled, as their high-speed nature makes earlier testing difficult and expensive. As a result, defects often are not discovered until after assembly. This could result in a substantial number of defective products being assembled and tested or shipped, thus lowering our yields and increasing our costs. These risks could result in product shortages or increased costs of assembling, testing or even replacing our products.

Although we test our products before shipment, they are complex and may contain defects and errors. In the past we have encountered defects and errors in our products. Because our products are sometimes integrated with products from other vendors, it can be difficult to identify the source of any particular problem. Delivery of products with defects or reliability, quality or compatibility problems, may damage our reputation and our ability to retain existing customers and attract new customers. In addition, product defects and errors could result in additional development costs, diversion of technical resources, delayed product shipments, increased product returns, warranty and product liability claims against us that may not be fully covered by insurance. Any of these circumstances could substantially harm our business.

We face foreign business, political and economic risks because a majority of our products and our customers’ products are manufactured and sold outside of the United States.

A substantial portion of our business is conducted outside of the United States. As a result, we are subject to foreign business, political and economic risks. Nearly all of our products are manufactured in Taiwan or elsewhere in Asia. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, approximately 73.4% and 75.6% of our revenue, respectively, was generated from customers and distributors located outside of United States, primarily in Asia, and was 75.4% and 72.9 % for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, respectively. We anticipate that sales outside of the United States will continue to account for a substantial portion of our revenue in future periods. In addition, we undertake various sales and marketing activities through regional offices in several other countries and we have significantly expanded our research and development operations outside of the United States. We intend to continue to expand our international business activities. Accordingly, we are subject to international risks, including, but not limited to:

·	political, social and economic instability;
·	exposure to different business practices and legal standards, particularly with respect to intellectual property;
·	natural disasters and public health emergencies;
·	nationalization of business and blocking of cash flows;
·	trade and travel restrictions;
·	the imposition of governmental controls and restrictions;
·	burdens of complying with a variety of foreign laws;
·	import and export license requirements and restrictions of the United States and each other country in which we operate;
·	unexpected changes in regulatory requirements;
·	foreign technical standards;

·	changes in taxation and tariffs;
·	difficulties in staffing and managing international operations;
·	fluctuations in currency exchange rates;
·	difficulties in collecting receivables from foreign entities or delayed revenue recognition;
·	expense and difficulties in protecting our intellectual property in foreign jurisdictions;
·	exposure to possible litigation or claims in foreign jurisdictions; and,
·	potentially adverse tax consequences.

Any of the factors described above may have a material adverse effect on our ability to increase or maintain our foreign sales. In addition, original equipment manufacturers that design our semiconductors into their products sell them outside of the United States. This exposes us indirectly to foreign risks. Because sales of our products are denominated exclusively in United States dollars, relative increases in the value of the United States dollar will increase the foreign currency price equivalent of our products, which could lead to a change in the competitive nature of these products in the marketplace. This in turn could lead to a reduction in sales and profits.

Table of Contents

We may have to invest more resources in research and development than anticipated, which could increase our operating expenses and negatively impact our operating results.

As part of our current business model, we outsource certain of our R&D activities in response to certain peak resource requirements and on-going development activities and we have transitioned some of our R&D activities to new locations in Asia. If we are unable to properly manage and effectively utilize these resources, they could have adverse effects on our business, financial condition and operating results.

Moreover, if new competitors, technological advances by existing competitors, our entry into new markets, or other competitive factors require us to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in our research and development efforts, our operating expenses would increase. If we are required to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in research and development efforts without a corresponding increase in revenue, our operating results could decline. Research and development expenses are likely to fluctuate from time to time to the extent we make periodic incremental investments in research and development and these investments may be independent of our level of revenue which could negatively impact our financial results. In order to remain competitive, we anticipate that we will continue to devote substantial resources to research and development, and we expect these expenses to increase in absolute dollars in the foreseeable future due to the increased complexity and the greater number of products under development.

The success of our business depends upon our ability to adequately protect our intellectual property.

We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark, mask work and trade secret laws, as well as nondisclosure agreements and other methods, to protect our proprietary technologies. We have been issued patents and have a number of pending patent applications. However, we cannot assure you that any patents will be issued as a result of any applications or, if issued, that any claims allowed will protect our technology. In addition, we do not file patent applications on a worldwide basis, meaning we do not have patent protection in some jurisdictions. It may be possible for a third-party, including our licensees, to misappropriate our copyrighted material or trademarks. It is possible that existing or future patents may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented and effective patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret protection may be unavailable or limited in foreign countries. It may be possible for a third-party to copy or otherwise obtain and use our products or technology without authorization, develop similar technology independently or design around our patents in the United States and in other jurisdictions. It is also possible that some of our existing or new licensing relationships will enable other parties to use our intellectual property to compete against us. Legal actions to enforce intellectual property rights tend to be lengthy and expensive and the outcome often is not predictable. As a result, despite our efforts and expenses, we may be unable to prevent others from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property, which could harm our business. In addition, practicality also limits our assertion of intellectual property rights. Patent litigation is expensive and its results are often unpredictable. Assertion of intellectual property rights often results in counterclaims for perceived violations of the defendant’s intellectual property rights and/or antitrust claims. Certain parties after receipt of an assertion of infringement will cut off all commercial relationships with the party making the assertion, thus making assertions against suppliers, customers and key business partners risky. If we forgo making such claims, we may run the risk of creating legal and equitable defenses for an infringer.

We generally enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants and strategic partners. We also try to control access to and distribution of our technologies, documentation and other proprietary information. Despite these efforts, internal or external parties may attempt to copy, disclose, obtain or use our products, services or technology without our authorization. Also, current or former employees may seek employment with our business partners, customers or competitors, and we cannot assure you that the confidential nature of our proprietary information will be maintained in the course of such future employment. Additionally, current, departing or former employees or third parties could attempt to penetrate our computer systems and networks to misappropriate our proprietary information and technology or interrupt our business. Because the techniques used by computer hackers and others to access or sabotage networks change frequently and generally are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate, counter or ameliorate these techniques. As a result, our technologies and processes may be misappropriated, particularly in countries where laws may not protect our proprietary rights as fully as in the United States.

Our products may contain technology provided to us by other parties such as contractors, suppliers or customers. We may have little or no ability to determine in advance whether such technology infringes the intellectual property rights of a third party. Our contractors, suppliers and licensors may not be required to indemnify us in the event that a claim of infringement is asserted against us, or they may be required to indemnify us only up to a maximum amount, above which we would be responsible for any further costs or damages. In addition, we may have little or no ability to correct errors in the technology provided by such contractors, suppliers and licensors, or to continue to develop new generations of such technology. Accordingly, we may be dependent on their ability and willingness to do so. In the event of a problem with such technology, or in the event that our rights to use such technology become impaired, we may be unable to ship our products containing such technology, and may be unable to replace the technology with a suitable alternative within the time frame needed by our customers.

Our participation in working groups for the development and promotion of industry standards in our target markets, including the HDMI and MHL specifications, requires us to license some of our intellectual property for free or under specified terms and conditions, which may make it easier for others to compete with us in such markets.

A key element of our business strategy includes participating in working groups to establish industry standards in our target markets, promoting and enhancing specifications and developing and marketing products based on such specifications and future enhancements. We are a founder in the working groups that develop and promote the HDMI specification and the MHL specification. In connection with our participation in such working groups:

·	we must license specific elements of our intellectual property to others for use in implementing the HDMI specification and we may license additional intellectual property as the HDMI founders group promotes enhancements to the HDMI specification; and
·	we must agree not to assert certain necessary patent claims against other members of the MHL consortium who may infringe such claims in implementing the MHL specification and this non-assert obligation may cover more of our patent portfolio as the MHL promoter group promotes enhancements to the MHL specification.

Accordingly, certain companies that implement the HDMI and MHL specifications in their products can use specific elements of our intellectual property to compete with us, in certain cases, for free. Although in the case of the HDMI and MHL specifications, there are annual fees and royalties associated with the adopters’ agreements, there can be no assurance that our shares of such annual fees and royalties will adequately compensate us for having to license or refrain from asserting our intellectual property.

Through our wholly-owned subsidiary, HDMI Licensing, LLC, we act as agent of the HDMI specification and are responsible for promoting and administering the specification. We receive all the license fees paid by adopters of the HDMI specification to cover the costs we incur to promote and administer the HDMI specification. There can be no assurance that, going forward, we will continue to act as agent of the HDMI specification and/or receive all the license fees paid by HDMI adopters. After an initial period during which we received all of the royalties paid by HDMI adopters, in 2007, the HDMI founders reallocated the royalties to reflect each founder’s relative contribution of intellectual property to the HDMI specification, and following this reallocation, our portion of HDMI royalties was reduced to approximately 62%. In 2010, HDMI founders again reviewed the allocation of HDMI royalties and agreed on an allocation formula that reduced to approximately 50% the portion of HDMI royalties received by us effective January 2011. Further, we expect that HDMI founders will continue to review the allocation of HDMI royalties from time to time and there can be no assurance regarding the portion of HDMI royalties received by us in the future.

Through our wholly-owned subsidiary, MHL, LLC, we act as agent of the MHL specification and are responsible for promoting and administering the specification. As agent, we are entitled to receive license fees paid by adopters of the MHL specification sufficient to reimburse us the costs we incur to promote and administer the specification. Given the limited number of MHL adopters to date, we do not believe that the license fees paid by such adopters will be sufficient to reimburse us for these costs and there can be no assurance that the license fees paid by MHL adopters will ever be sufficient to reimburse us the cost we incur as agent of the specification.

We intend to promote and continue to be involved and actively participate in other standard setting initiatives. For example, we also recently joined the Serial Port Memory Technology Working Group (SPMTWG) to develop and promote a new memory technology. Accordingly, we may license additional elements of our intellectual property to others for use in implementing, developing, promoting or adopting standards in our target markets, in certain circumstances at little or no cost. This may make it easier for others to compete with us in such markets. In addition, even if we receive license fees and/or royalties in connection with the licensing of our intellectual property, there can be no assurance that such license fees and/or royalties will adequately compensate us for having to license our intellectual property.

Table of Contents

Our success depends in part on our relationships with strategic partners and use of technologies.

We have entered into and expect to continue to enter into strategic partnerships with third parties. Negotiating and performing under these strategic partnerships involves significant time and expense; we may not realize anticipated increases in revenue, standards adoption or cost savings; and these strategic partnerships may make it easier for the third parties to compete with us; any of which may have a negative effect our business and results of operations.

Strategic partnerships that we enter into with third parties may not result in the anticipated results. For example, in February 2007, we entered into a licensing agreement with Sunplus Technology Co., Ltd. (Sunplus), which granted us the rights to use and further develop advanced IP technology. Previously, we believed that the IP licensed under this agreement enhanced our ability to develop DTV technology and other related consumer product offerings. Based on the Company’s product strategy as of October 2009, we realized the IP obtained through the Sunplus agreement did not align with our product roadmap and during October 2009, we decided to write off our investment in Sunplus IP. This decision was prompted by a change in our product strategy due to market place and related competitive dynamics.

Our business may be impacted as a result of the adoption of competing standards and technologies by the broader market.

The success of our business has been significantly related to our participation in standard setting organizations. From time to time, competing standards have been established which negatively impact the success of existing standards or jeopardize the creation of a new standard. DisplayPort is an example of a competing standard on a different technology base which has created an alternative high definition connectivity methodology in the PC space. This standard has been adopted by several large PC manufactures. While currently not as widely recognized as the HDMI standard, DisplayPort does represent a viable alternative to the HDMI or MHL standards. If DisplayPort should gain broader adoption, our HDMI or MHL businesses could be negatively impacted and our revenues could be reduced.

Our business is dependent on the continued adoption and widespread implementation of the HDMI™ specification.

Our success is largely dependent upon the continued adoption and widespread implementation of the HDMI specification. More than 75% of our revenue is derived from the sale of HDMI enabled products and the licensing of our HDMI technology. Our leadership in the market for HDMI-enabled products and intellectual property has been based on our ability to introduce first-to-market semiconductor and IP solutions to our customers and to continue to innovate within the standard. Therefore, our inability to be first to market with our HDMI enabled products and intellectual property or to continue to drive innovation in the HDMI specification could have an adverse impact on our business going forward. In addition, the establishment and adoption by the markets we sell into of a competing digital interconnect technology could have an adverse impact on our ability to sell our products and license our intellectual property and therefore our revenues and business.

As the agent for the HDMI specification, we derive revenue from the license fees paid by adopters, and as a founder we derive revenue from the royalties paid by the adopters of the HDMI technology. Any development that has the effect of lowering the number of adopters of the HDMI standard will negatively impact these license fees and royalties. Also, when the HDMI consortium was first formed, we received 100% of the royalties collected from HDMI adopters. During 2007, the founders agreed to share the HDMI adopter’s royalty revenues among the various founders, such that we no longer receive all of the royalties, and in 2010, the HDMI founders agreed upon a royalty allocation formula that reduced our share of HDMI royalties effective January 2011. The allocation of license fees and royalty revenue among the HDMI founders is an issue that is reviewed and discussed by the founders from time to time. There can be no assurance that going forward we will continue to act as agent of the HDMI specification or to receive the share of HDMI license fees and royalties that we currently receive. If our share of these license fees and royalties is reduced, this decision will have a negative impact on our revenues. Refer to the previously discussed risk factor above which also discusses the sharing of HDMI royalty revenues among various founders.

Our success depends on managing our relationship with Intel.

Intel has a dominant role in many of the markets in which we compete, such as PC and storage and is a growing presence in the CE market. We have a multi-faceted relationship with Intel that is complex and requires significant management attention, including:

·	Intel and Silicon Image have been parties to business cooperation agreements;
·	Intel and Silicon Image are parties to a patent cross-license;
·	Intel and Silicon Image worked together to develop HDCP;
·	an Intel subsidiary has the exclusive right to license HDCP, of which we are a licensee;
·	Intel and Silicon Image were two of the promoters of the DDWG;
·	Intel is a promoter of the SATA working group, of which we are a contributor;
·	we believe that Intel has the market presence to affect adoption of HDMI by either endorsing complementary technology or promulgating a competing standard, which could affect demand for our products;
·	Intel may potentially integrate the functionality of our products, including SATA, DVI, MHL or HDMI into its own chips and chipsets, thereby displacing demand for some of our products;

·	Intel may design new technologies that would require us to re-design our products for compatibility, thus increasing our R&D expense and reducing our revenue;
·	Intel’s technology, including its chipsets, may lower barriers to entry for other parties who may enter the market and compete with us; and
·	Intel may enter into or continue relationships with our competitors that can put us at a relative disadvantage.

Our cooperation and competition with Intel can lead to positive benefits, if managed effectively. If our relationship with Intel is not managed effectively, it could seriously harm our business, negatively affect our revenue and increase our operating expenses.

Table of Contents

New Releases of Microsoft Windows® and Apple Mac OS® operating systems may render our chips inoperable

ICs targeted to PC, laptop, or netbook designs (whether running Microsoft Windows ®, Apple Mac OS® or Linux operating systems) often require device driver software to operate. This software is difficult to produce and requires various certifications such as Microsoft’s Windows Hardware Quality Labs (WHQL) before being released. Each new revision of an operating system may require a new software driver and associated testing/certification. Failure to produce this software can have a negative impact on our relation with Microsoft and/or Apple and may damage our reputation as a quality supplier of SATA and HDMI products in the eyes of end consumers.

We have granted Intel rights with respect to our intellectual property, which could allow Intel to develop products that compete with ours or otherwise reduce the value of our intellectual property.

We entered into a patent cross-license agreement with Intel in which each of us granted the other a license to use the patents filed by the grantor prior to a specified date, except for identified types of products. We believe that the scope of our license to Intel excludes our current products and anticipated future products. Intel could, however, exercise its rights under this agreement to use our patents to develop and market other products that compete with ours, without payment to us. Additionally, Intel’s rights to our patents could reduce the value of our patents to any third-party who otherwise might be interested in acquiring rights to use our patents in such products. Finally, Intel could endorse competing products, including a competing digital interface, or develop its own proprietary digital interface. Any of these actions could substantially harm our business and results of operations.

We may become engaged in additional intellectual property litigation that could be time-consuming, may be expensive to prosecute or defend and could adversely affect our ability to sell our product.

In recent years, there has been significant litigation in the United States and in other jurisdictions involving patents and other intellectual property rights. This litigation is particularly prevalent in the semiconductor industry, in which a number of companies aggressively use their patent portfolios to bring infringement claims. In addition, in recent years, there has been an increase in the filing of so-called “nuisance suits,” alleging infringement of intellectual property rights. These claims may be asserted as counterclaims in response to claims made by a company alleging infringement of intellectual property rights. These suits pressure defendants into entering settlement arrangements to quickly dispose of such suits, regardless of merit. In addition, as is common in the semiconductor industry, from time to time we have been notified that we may be infringing certain patents or other intellectual property rights of others. Responding to such claims, regardless of their merit, can be time consuming, result in costly litigation, divert management’s attention and resources and cause us to incur significant expenses. As each claim is evaluated, we may consider the desirability of entering into settlement or licensing agreements. No assurance can be given that settlements will occur or that licenses can be obtained on acceptable terms or that litigation will not occur. In the event there is a temporary or permanent injunction entered prohibiting us from marketing or selling certain of our products, or a successful claim of infringement against us requiring us to pay damages or royalties to a third-party and we fail to develop or license a substitute technology, our business, results of operations or financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Any potential intellectual property litigation against us or in which we become involved may be expensive and time-consuming and may divert our resources and the attention of our executives. It could also force us to do one or more of the following:

·	stop selling products or using technology that contains the allegedly infringing intellectual property;
·	attempt to obtain a license to the relevant intellectual property, which license may not be available on reasonable terms or at all; and
·	attempt to redesign products that contain the allegedly infringing intellectual property.

If we take any of these actions, we may be unable to manufacture and sell our products. We may be exposed to liability for monetary damages, the extent of which would be very difficult to accurately predict. In addition, we may be exposed to customer claims, for potential indemnity obligations and to customer dissatisfaction and a discontinuance of purchases of our products while the litigation is pending. Any of these consequences could substantially harm our business and results of operations.

We have entered into and may again be required to enter into, patent or other intellectual property cross-licenses.

Many companies have significant patent portfolios or key specific patents, or other intellectual property in areas in which we compete. Many of these companies appear to have policies of imposing cross-licenses on other participants in their markets, which may include areas in which we compete. As a result, we have been required, either under pressure of litigation or by significant vendors or customers, to enter into cross licenses or non-assertion agreements relating to patents or other intellectual property. This permits the cross-licensee, or beneficiary of a non-assertion agreement, to use certain or all of our patents and/or certain other intellectual property for free to compete with us. Our results of operations could be adversely affected by the use of cross-licensee or beneficiary of a non-assertion agreement of all our patents and/or certain other intellectual property.

We indemnify certain of our licensing customers against infringement.

We indemnify certain of our licensing agreements customers for any expenses or liabilities resulting from third-party claims of infringements of patent, trademark, trade secret, or copyright rights by the technology we license. Certain of these indemnification provisions are perpetual from execution of the agreement and, in some instances; the maximum amount of potential future indemnification is not limited. To date, we have not paid any such claims or been required to defend any lawsuits with respect to any claim. In the event that we were required to defend any lawsuits with respect to our indemnification obligations, or to pay any claim, our results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Table of Contents

We must attract and retain qualified personnel to be successful and competition for qualified personnel is increasing in our market.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon the continued contributions of our key management, technical and sales personnel, many of who would be difficult to replace. The loss of one or more of these employees could harm our business. Although we have entered into a limited number of employment contracts with certain executive officers, we generally do not have employment contracts with our key employees. Our success also depends on our ability to identify, attract and retain qualified technical, sales, marketing, finance and managerial personnel. Competition for qualified personnel is particularly intense in our industry and in our location. This makes it difficult to retain our key personnel and to recruit highly qualified personnel. We have experienced and may continue to experience, difficulty in hiring and retaining candidates with appropriate qualifications. To be successful, we need to hire candidates with appropriate qualifications and retain our key executives and employees. Replacing departing executive officers and key employees can involve organizational disruption and uncertain timing.

The volatility of our stock price has had an impact on our ability to offer competitive equity-based incentives to current and prospective employees, thereby affecting our ability to attract and retain highly qualified technical personnel. If these adverse conditions continue, we may not be able to hire or retain highly qualified employees in the future and this could harm our business. In addition, regulations adopted by The NASDAQ Stock Market requiring shareholder approval for all stock option plans, as well as regulations adopted by the New York Stock Exchange prohibiting NYSE member organizations from giving a proxy to vote on equity compensation plans unless the beneficial owner of the shares has given voting instructions, could make it more difficult for us to grant options to employees in the future. In addition, FASB ASC No. 718-10, Stock Compensation, requires us to record compensation expense for options granted to employees. To the extent that new regulations make it more difficult or expensive to grant options to employees, we may incur increased cash compensation costs or find it difficult to attract, retain and motivate employees, either of which could harm our business.

If our internal control over financial reporting or disclosure controls and procedures are not effective, there may be errors in our financial statements that could require restatement or our filings may not be timely and investors may lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could lead to a decline in our stock price. While we have not identified any material weaknesses in the past three years, we cannot assure you that a material weakness will not be identified in the future.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires us to evaluate the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of the end of each year and to include a management report assessing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in each Annual Report on Form 10-K. Section 404 also requires our independent registered public accounting firm to report on, our internal control over financial reporting.

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our internal control over financial reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the controls. Over time, controls may become inadequate because changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may occur. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

As a result, we cannot assure you that significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting will not be identified in the future. Any failure to maintain or implement required new or improved controls, or any difficulties we encounter in their implementation, could result in significant deficiencies or material weaknesses, cause us to fail to timely meet our periodic reporting obligations, or result in material misstatements in our financial statements. Any such failure could also adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations and annual auditor attestation reports regarding disclosure controls and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting required under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules promulgated thereunder. The existence of a material weakness could result in errors in our financial statements that could result in a restatement of financial statements, cause us to fail to timely meet our reporting obligations and cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, leading to a decline in our stock price.

We have experienced transitions in our management team, our board of directors in the past and may continue to do so in the future, which could result in disruptions in our operations and require additional costs.

We have experienced a number of transitions with respect to our board of directors and executive officers in recent quarters, including the following:

·	In March 2009, Paul Dal Santo resigned from his position as chief operating officer.
·	In September 2009, Steve Tirado resigned from his positions as chief executive officer and director and Hal Covert was appointed as president and chief operating officer.
·	In January 2010, Camillo Martino was appointed as chief executive officer and director.
·	In January 2010, Harold Covert, who was appointed president and chief operating officer on September 25, 2009 while we undertook a search for a new chief executive officer, agreed to continue in his capacity as our president (but to no longer serve as chief financial officer or chief operating officer) during a transitional period from January 6, 2010 through September 30, 2010. On January 5, 2010, our Board of Directors also elected Mr. Covert to the Board, effective January 15, 2010 and through September 30, 2010.
·	In March 2010, J. Duane Northcutt resigned from his position as chief technology officer.
·	In March 2010, Tim Vehling, former vice president of worldwide marketing, was appointed as vice president of the products business group and Eric Almgren, former vice president of business development and IP licensing, was appointed as vice president of the IP business group.
·	In April 2010, Noland Granberry was appointed as our chief financial officer.
·	In April 2010, Sal Cobar resigned from his position as vice president of worldwide sales.
·	In September 2010, Harold Covert resigned from his positions as president and director.

Any future transitions may result in disruptions in our operations and require additional costs.

Table of Contents

We have been and may continue to become the target of securities class action suits and derivative suits which could result in substantial costs and divert management attention and resources.

Securities class action suits and derivative suits are often brought against companies, particularly technology companies, following periods of volatility in the market price of their securities. Defending against these suits, even if meritless, can result in substantial costs to us and could divert the attention of our management.

Our operations and the operations of our significant customers, third-party wafer foundries and third-party assembly and test subcontractors are located in are as susceptible to natural disasters.

Our operations are headquartered in the San Francisco Bay Area, which is susceptible to earthquakes. TSMC, the outside foundry that produces the majority of our semiconductor products, is located in Taiwan. Siliconware Precision Industries Co. Ltd., or SPIL, Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, or ASE, and Amkor Taiwan are subcontractors located in Taiwan that assemble and test our semiconductor products. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2011, customers and distributors located in Japan generated 17.8% and 24.4% of our revenue, respectively, and customers and distributors located in Taiwan generated 34.2% and 29.9% of our revenue, respectively. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, customers and distributors located in Japan generated 34.2% and 29.3% of our revenue, respectively, and customers and distributors located in Taiwan generated 19.5% and 19.3% of our revenue, respectively. Both Taiwan and Japan are susceptible to earthquakes, typhoons and other natural disasters.

In March 2011, Japan was hit by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake which triggered extremely destructive tsunami waves. The earthquake and tsunami significantly impacted the Japanese people and the overall economy of Japan resulting to reduced consumer spending in Japan and supply chain issues.

Our business, including a potential reduction of revenues, would be negatively affected if any of the following occurred:

·	an earthquake or other disaster in the San Francisco Bay Area or the Los Angeles area damaged our facilities or disrupted the supply of water or electricity to our headquarters;
·	an earthquake, typhoon or other disaster in Taiwan or Japan resulted in shortages of water, electricity or transportation, limiting the production capacity of our outside foundries or the ability of ASE to provide assembly and test services;
·	an earthquake, typhoon or other disaster in Taiwan or Japan damaged the facilities or equipment of our customers and distributors, resulting in reduced purchases of our products; or
·	an earthquake, typhoon or other disaster in Taiwan or Japan disrupted the operations of suppliers to our Taiwanese or Japanese customers, outside foundries or ASE, which in turn disrupted the operations of these customers, foundries or ASE and resulted in reduced purchases of our products or shortages in our product supply.

Terrorist attacks or war could lead to economic instability and adversely affect our operations, results of operations and stock price.

The United States has taken and continues to take, military action against terrorism and currently has troops in Iraq and in Afghanistan. In addition, the current tensions regarding nuclear arms in North Korea and Iran could escalate into armed hostilities or war. Acts of terrorism or armed hostilities may disrupt or result in instability in the general economy and financial markets and in consumer demand for the OEM’s products that incorporate our products. Disruptions and instability in the general economy could reduce demand for our products or disrupt the operations of our customers, suppliers, distributors and contractors, many of whom are located in Asia, which would in turn adversely affect our operations and results of operations. Disruptions and instability in financial markets could adversely affect our stock price. Armed hostilities or war in South Korea could disrupt the operations of the research and development contractors we utilize there, which would adversely affect our research and development capabilities and ability to timely develop and introduce new products and product improvements.

Changes in environmental rules and regulations could increase our costs and reduce our revenue.

Several jurisdictions have implemented rules that would require that certain products, including semiconductors, be made “green,” which means that the products need to be lead free and be free of certain banned substances. All of our products are available to customers in a green format. While we believe that we are generally in compliance with existing regulations, such environmental regulations are subject to change and the jurisdictions may impose additional regulations which could require us to incur costs to develop replacement products. These changes will require us to incur cost or may take time or may not always be economically or technically feasible, or may require disposal of non-compliant inventory. In addition, any requirement to dispose or abate previously sold products would require us to incur the costs of setting up and implementing such a program.

Provisions of our charter documents and Delaware law could prevent or delay a change in control and may reduce the market price of our common stock.

Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that a stockholder may consider favorable. These provisions include:

·	authorizing the issuance of preferred stock without stockholder approval;
·	providing for a classified board of directors with staggered, three-year terms;
·	requiring advance notice of stockholder nominations for the board of directors;
·	providing the board of directors the opportunity to expand the number of directors without notice to stockholders;
·	prohibiting cumulative voting in the election of directors;
·	requiring super-majority voting to amend some provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws;

·	limiting the persons who may call special meetings of stockholders; and
·	prohibiting stockholder actions by written consent.

Provisions of Delaware law also may discourage, delay or prevent someone from acquiring or merging with us.

Table of Contents

The price of our stock fluctuates substantially and may continue to do so.

The stock market has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have affected the market valuation of many technology companies, including Silicon Image. These factors, as well as general economic and political conditions, may materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock in the future. The market price of our common stock has fluctuated significantly and may continue to fluctuate in response to a number of factors, including, but not limited to:

·	actual or anticipated changes in our operating results;
·	changes in expectations of our future financial performance;
·	changes in market valuations of comparable companies in our markets;
·	changes in market valuations or expectations of future financial performance of our vendors or customers;
·	changes in our key executives and technical personnel; and

·	announcements by us or our competitors of significant technical innovations, design wins, contracts, standards or acquisitions.

Due to these factors, the price of our stock may decline. In addition, the stock market experiences volatility that is often unrelated to the performance of particular companies. These market fluctuations may cause our stock price to decline regardless of our performance.

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

None

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

Not applicable.

Item 4. Reserved

Item 5. Other Information

Beginning with the three months ended March 31, 2011, as a result of increasing Mobile product revenue as mobile device manufacturers start to integrate Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL™)-based products into their smart phones and tablets, we have reclassified our product revenue under following three market categories: 1) Consumer Electronics (CE); 2) Mobile; and 3) Personal Computers (PC). Previously, we reported our product revenue under these classifications: 1) CE, 2) PC and 3) Storage. Due to our recent realignment of our short-term and long-term strategies to our core competencies, we believe that the storage business, unlike in the past when it was a significant market, will not be a significant part of our business in fiscal year 2011 and in future years. As a result of this change, our CE market category now consists of the DTV and Home Theater markets. Our Mobile category now incorporates all mobile-related activities, including both HDMI and MHL. PC consists of all PC and Storage related activities. As a result of this change, we are reporting product revenue under the new primary markets for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. The table below presents our product revenue for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 had the change in product primary market categories been in effect for these years.

	Year Ended December 31
	2010		2009		2008
Consumer Electronics	$	118,192	$	97,501	$	159,985
Mobile		10,525		2,684		3,368
Personal Computers		24,124		22,483		69,848
Total product revenue	$	152,841	$	122,668	$	233,201

The Storage revenue for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 which was included in the PC revenue category under the new market categorization in the table above amounted to $12.9 million, $11.4 million and $25.5 million, respectively.

Table of Contents

Item 6. Exhibits

(a) Exhibits

					Filing	Filed
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	File No.	Exhibit	Date	Herewith
10.01 *	Amended and Restated 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.					X
31.01	Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
31.02	Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
32.01**	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
32.02**	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X

101.INS***
XBRL Instance Document						X

101.SCH***
XBRL Taxonomy Schema
Linkbase Document						X

101.CAL***
XBRL Taxonomy
Calculation Linkbase
Document						X

101.LAB***
XBRL Taxonomy Labels
Linkbase Document						X

101.PRE***
XBRL Taxonomy
Presentation Linkbase
Document						X

101.DEF***
XBRL Taxonomy
Definition Linkbase
Document						X

*	This exhibit is a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

** This exhibit is being furnished, rather than filed, and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing of the registrant, in accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

*** In accordance with Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, these interactive data files are furnished and deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and otherwise are not subject to liability under these sections.

Table of Contents

Signature

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Dated: August 3, 2011

Silicon Image, Inc.

	/s/ Noland Granberry
	Noland Granberry Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)

Table of Contents

Exhibit Index

					Filing	Filed
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	File No.	Exhibit	Date	Herewith
10.01 *	Amended and Restated 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.					X
31.01	Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
31.02	Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
32.01**	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X
32.02**	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.					X

101.INS***
XBRL Instance Document						X

101.SCH***
XBRL Taxonomy Schema
Linkbase Document						X

101.CAL***
XBRL Taxonomy
Calculation Linkbase
Document						X

101.LAB***
XBRL Taxonomy Labels
Linkbase Document						X

101.PRE***
XBRL Taxonomy
Presentation Linkbase
Document						X

101.DEF***
XBRL Taxonomy
Definition Linkbase
Document						X

* This exhibit is a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

** This exhibit is being furnished, rather than filed, and shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing of the registrant, in accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

SILICON IMAGE INC - FORM 10-Q - August 3, 2011

Attached files

SILICON IMAGE INC Reports