| SEC Info | Home | Search | My Interests | Help | Sign In | Please Sign In | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Database maintenance is being performed. If something doesn’t work, please try again shortly. |
As Of Filer Filing As/For/On Docs:Pgs Issuer Agent 8/29/03 American Superconductor Corp/DE S-3 3:177 RR Donnelley/FA
Document/Exhibit Description Pages Size
1: S-3 Registration Statement for Securities Offered HTML 1,246K
Pursuant to a Transaction
2: EX-5.1 Opinion of Hale and Dorr Llp HTML 16K
3: EX-23.2 Consent of Pricewaterhousecoopers HTML 6K
|
| FORM S-3 |
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 29, 2003
Registration No. 333-
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM S-3
REGISTRATION STATEMENT
UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
American Superconductor Corporation
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
| Delaware | 04-2959321 | |
| (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
Two Technology Drive
Westborough, Massachusetts 01581-1727
(508) 836-4200
(Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices)
Gregory J. Yurek
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
American Superconductor Corporation
Two Technology Drive
Westborough, Massachusetts 01581-1727
(508) 836-4200
(Name, Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Agent for Service)
Copies to:
| Patrick J. Rondeau, Esq. | William C. Rogers, Esq. | |
| Hale and Dorr LLP | Choate, Hall & Stewart | |
| 60 State Street | Exchange Place, 53 State Street | |
| Boston, Massachusetts 02109 | Boston, Massachusetts 02109 | |
| Telephone: (617) 526-6000 | Telephone: (617) 248-5000 | |
| Telecopy: (617) 526-5000 | Telecopy: (617) 248-4000 |
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effective date hereof.
If the only securities being registered on this form are being offered pursuant to dividend or interest reinvestment plans, please check the following box. ¨
If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, other than securities offered only in connection with dividend or interest reinvestment plans, check the following box. ¨
If this form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨
If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434, please check the following box. ¨
CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE
| Title of each class of securities to be registered |
Amount to be Registered |
Proposed Maximum Offering Price Per Unit (1) |
Proposed Maximum Aggregate Offering Price (1) |
Amount of Registration Fee | ||||||||
| Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share (2) |
4,600,000 | (3) | $ | 11.60 | $ | 53,360,000 | $ | 4,317 | ||||
| (1) | Estimated solely for purposes of calculating the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(c) under the Securities Act, based on average of high and low price per share of the common stock as reported on the NASDAQ National Market on August 25, 2003. |
| (2) | Includes rights to purchase shares of common stock pursuant to the Rights Agreement, as amended, between the Registrant and American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as Rights Agent. |
| (3) | Includes 600,000 shares of common stock subject to the underwriters’ over-allotment option. |
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.
The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. A registration statement relating to these securities has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities in any state where the offer or sale is not permitted.
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED AUGUST 29, 2003
PROSPECTUS
4,000,000 Shares
Common Stock
We are offering 4,000,000 shares of our common stock. Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “AMSC”. The last reported sale price of our common stock on August 26, 2003 on the NASDAQ National Market was $13.40 per share.
Investing in our common stock involves risks. See “ Risk Factors” beginning on page 7.
| Per Share | Total | |||
| Public Offering Price |
$ | $ | ||
| Underwriting Discounts |
$ | $ | ||
| Proceeds, before expenses, to American Superconductor. |
$ | $ | ||
The underwriters have a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 600,000 shares of common stock from us to cover over-allotments.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.
Needham & Company, Inc.
The date of this prospectus is , 2003.
| 3 | ||
| 7 | ||
| 10 | ||
| 10 | ||
| 11 | ||
| 11 | ||
| 12 | ||
| 13 | ||
| 14 | ||
| Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations | 16 | |
| 29 | ||
| 54 | ||
| 57 | ||
| 59 | ||
| 61 | ||
| 61 | ||
| 61 | ||
| 61 | ||
| F-1 |
You should rely only on the information contained or incorporated by reference to this prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with information different from that contained or incorporated by reference to this prospectus. Under no circumstances should the delivery to you of this prospectus or any sale made pursuant to this prospectus create any implication that the information contained in this prospectus is correct as of any time after the date of this prospectus.
The following summary highlights the key information contained elsewhere in this prospectus. It does not contain all the information that may be important to you. You should read this entire prospectus carefully, especially the discussion of “Risk Factors” and our selected consolidated financial statements and related notes, before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock. In this prospectus, when we use phrases such as “we,” “our” and “us,” we are referring to American Superconductor Corporation and its subsidiaries as a whole, except where it is clear from the context that any of these terms refers only to American Superconductor Corporation. Unless otherwise indicated, the information in this prospectus assumes the underwriters do not exercise their over-allotment option.
American Superconductor
Overview
We are a leading electricity solutions company. We develop solutions and manufacture products to dramatically improve the cost, efficiency and reliability of systems that generate, deliver and use electric power. Our products include high temperature superconductor, or HTS, wire for electric power, transportation, medical and industrial processing applications; motors and generators based on our HTS wire for ship propulsion and industrial uses, as well as synchronous condensers for transmission and distribution grid reliability; and advanced power electronic and HTS systems that ensure the quality and reliability of electricity for residential, commercial and industrial end users. Our HTS wire carries direct current, or DC, without any loss of electrical power, resulting in high electrical efficiency. Our HTS wire also conducts more than 140 times the electrical current of copper wire of the same dimensions, which dramatically reduces the size and weight of electrical equipment made with our HTS wire and significantly increases the power throughput of power cables. Our current and planned products are sold or planned to be sold to electric utilities and transmission and distribution grid operators, electrical equipment manufacturers, industrial power users and shipbuilders that utilize electric motors for ship propulsion systems. Our technology and products are backed by an intellectual property portfolio that includes more than 420 patents and patent applications owned by us worldwide and more than 380 patents and patent applications licensed from others worldwide.
Our products, and those sold by others who incorporate our products, can:
| • | increase the reliability and power transfer capacity of the electricity transmission and distribution power grid; |
| • | improve the quality of electric power delivered to manufacturing plants; |
| • | reduce the manufacturing and operating costs of primary electrical equipment, including motors and generators; |
| • | reduce the size and weight of power cables, motors, generators, and other electric power equipment; and |
| • | conserve energy resources used to produce electricity, such as oil, gas and coal, by more efficiently conducting and converting electricity into useful forms. |
We believe there will be significant market demand for our products because of the following factors:
| • | demand for electric power continues to grow on a global basis; |
| • | the power grids in the U.S. and in many developed nations face severe constraints in adequately and safely delivering the amounts of power demanded by electric power users; |
3
| • | power reliability and power quality are increasingly important as economies transition to computerized and digitized systems; |
| • | U.S. domestic policy is now addressing the need to upgrade the transmission and distribution power grid as part of an effective long-term national energy policy; and |
| • | environmental threats from global industrialization and population growth continue to influence nations to encourage environmentally friendly power technologies. |
We conduct our operations through three business units:
| • | AMSC Wires, a developer and manufacturer of HTS wire; |
| • | SuperMachines, a designer and manufacturer of rotating machines based on our HTS wire, including electric motors, generators and synchronous condensers; and |
| • | Power Electronic Systems, a designer and manufacturer of power electronic converters and integrated power electronic systems that increase power grid reliability and throughput and ensure high quality power for industrial manufacturing operations. |
Market Overview
We believe a key factor affecting the market for our products and technologies is the need to upgrade the U.S. power grid. The Electric Power Research Institute, or EPRI, has estimated that electricity as a percentage of total energy use in the U.S., which was 25 percent in 1970, has recently reached 40 percent, and will increase to 50 percent by 2020. This large projected increase is being driven in part by growth in the use of computers, the Internet, telecommunications and consumer-based electronic products. Projected growth rates for electric power consumption by these new technologies are far higher than for traditional uses of power, which have historically grown in proportion to the gross domestic product of the U.S. The recent power outage, which occurred on August 14, 2003 across areas of the northeastern U.S. and Canada, has underscored the reliability and capacity deficiencies of the power grid in the U.S. We believe the growth in power consumption and the corresponding need for more reliable and higher quality power will create demand for many of our products.
Our Solutions
We develop and sell integrated power electronic systems commercially today. Currently, we have 18 integrated power electronic systems called D-VAR®, D-VAR Lite™ and D-SMES, at nine customer locations in the U.S. and Canada that provide voltage stabilization in power grids and that ensure the smooth connection of wind farms to power grids. These transmission reliability systems enable power grids to operate closer to their thermal limits, which in many cases means the existing power grid can carry more power.
We are developing a prototype HTS grid reliability product that we call SuperVAR™, which is a dynamic synchronous condenser that we expect to install in the power grid of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in November 2003. TVA, the largest public utility in the U.S., has given us an order for the first five SuperVAR™ production units, which we expect to deliver to TVA upon the successful operation of the prototype unit.
We expect that our HTS wire will enable a new class of high capacity, environmentally benign and easy to install transmission and distribution cables that address power grid congestion issues by increasing the thermal limit of existing or new rights of way. We expect that our HTS wire will be utilized in a number of new HTS power cable demonstrations over the next two years. We are currently manufacturing and selling first generation, or 1G, multi-filamentary composite HTS wire primarily to OEM manufacturers that incorporate the wire into prototype power cables, motors and generators. Our strategy is to reduce significantly the cost of manufacturing our HTS wire through the development of our second generation, or 2G, coated conductor composite HTS wire, which we expect will duplicate or exceed 1G HTS wire performance characteristics. We anticipate 2G HTS wire production to commence within the next three to four years.
4
We are developing electric motors and generators based on our HTS wire, which are smaller, lighter and more efficient compared with traditional electric motors and generators that utilize copper wire. We delivered a prototype 5 megawatt, or MW, ship propulsion motor to the U.S. Navy in July 2003, and we are currently developing a 36.5 MW ship propulsion motor for delivery to the U.S. Navy in March 2006 under a contract for approximately $70 million.
Corporate Information
Our principal executive offices are located at Two Technology Drive, Westborough, Massachusetts 01581 and our telephone number at that address is (508) 836-4200.
Our website is located at www.amsuper.com. We have not incorporated by reference into this prospectus the information on our website and you should not consider it to be a part of this document. Our website address is included as an inactive textual reference only.
The Offering
| Common stock offered |
4,000,000 shares | |
| Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
25,364,020 shares | |
| Use of Proceeds |
We intend to use the net proceeds for working capital and for general corporate purposes, including the scale-up of pilot manufacturing for our 2G HTS wire. | |
| NASDAQ National Market symbol |
AMSC | |
The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after this offering is based on the number of shares outstanding as of August 25, 2003 and excludes (a) options to purchase 5,291,705 shares of common stock outstanding as of August 25, 2003, (b) 769,715 additional shares of common stock available for future issuance under our stock option plans and (c) outstanding warrants to purchase 81,250 shares of common stock.
5
Summary Consolidated Financial Data
(in thousands, except per share data)
The following table provides selected financial data for the three years ended March 31, 2003 and the three months ended June 30, 2002 and 2003.
| Fiscal Year Ended March 31, |
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|||||||||||||||||||
| 2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2002 |
2003 |
||||||||||||||||
| (unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Statement of Operations Data |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenues |
$ | 16,768 | $ | 11,650 | $ | 21,020 | $ | 2,860 | $ | 7,756 | ||||||||||
| Total costs and expenses |
$ | 51,163 | $ | 73,203 | $ | 109,532 | $ | 14,040 | $ | 16,176 | ||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (21,676 | ) | $ | (56,985 | ) | $ | (87,633 | )(1) | $ | (10,829 | ) | $ | (8,356 | ) | |||||
| Net loss per common shares (basic and diluted) |
$ | (1.08 | ) | $ | (2.79 | ) | $ | (4.21 | ) | $ | (0.53 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | |||||
| Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (basic and diluted) |
20,127 | 20,409 | 20,831 | 20,535 | 21,344 | |||||||||||||||
| Other Data |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Research and development expenses |
$ | 22,832 | $ | 27,814 | $ | 21,940 | $ | 6,217 | $ | 4,863 | ||||||||||
| Pro forma research and development expenses (2) |
$ | 28,846 | $ | 36,882 | $ | 33,447 | $ | 8,358 | $ | 9,903 | ||||||||||
| (1) | Net loss for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2003 includes an impairment charge of $39,231 to write down our 1G HTS wire asset group, primarily comprised of the Devens, MA manufacturing facility and capital equipment, to an estimated fair value. |
| (2) | Pro forma research and development expenses is a non-GAAP financial measure that consists of research and development expenses plus research and development expenses related to externally funded development contracts included in costs of revenue, and research and development expenses offset by cost-sharing funding under government contracts. We believe that presenting pro forma research and development expenses provides useful information as to our aggregate research and development spending. Please see page 14 of this prospectus for a reconciliation between research and development expenses and pro forma research and development expenses. |
| As of June 30, 2003 | ||||||
| Balance Sheet Data | Actual |
As Adjusted | ||||
| (unaudited) | ||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents and long-term marketable securities |
$ | 12,102 | $ | 62,254 | ||
| Working capital |
12,299 | 62,451 | ||||
| Total assets |
93,262 | 143,414 | ||||
| Total liabilities |
13,614 | 13,614 | ||||
| Stockholders’ equity |
79,648 | 129,800 | ||||
The as adjusted balance sheet data as of June 30, 2003 gives effect to the sale by us of the 4,000,000 shares of common stock offered under this prospectus, at an assumed offering price of $13.40, the last reported sale price of our common stock on August 26, 2003 on the NASDAQ National Market, after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and the estimated offering expenses payable by us.
6
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors and the other information included or incorporated by reference into this prospectus before investing in our common stock. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our business operations. If any of these risks occur, our business could suffer, the market price of our common stock could decline and you could lose all or part of your investment in our common stock.
We have a history of operating losses, and we expect to continue to incur losses in the future.
We have been principally engaged in research and development activities. We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception. Our net loss for the three months ended June 30, 2003 was $8,356,000 and for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2003, March 31, 2002, and March 31, 2001 was $87,633,000, $56,985,000, and $21,676,000, respectively. Our accumulated deficit as of June 30, 2003 was $281,466,000. We expect to continue to incur operating losses until at least the end of fiscal 2005, and there can be no assurance that we will ever achieve profitability.
We had cash, cash-equivalents and long-term investments totaling $12.1 million at June 30, 2003. We believe, based upon our current business plan, that our existing capital resources, combined with conventional mortgage financing on our Devens, MA manufacturing facility that we believe we could obtain if necessary, will be sufficient to fund our operations until at least June 30, 2004. However, we believe our existing capital resources are insufficient to fund our working capital needs and anticipated losses significantly beyond June 30, 2004. Moreover, it is possible that we may need additional funds to fund our operations even prior to June 30, 2004 if our business does not progress as anticipated. There can be no assurance that such funds will be available, or available under terms acceptable to us.
There are a number of technological challenges that must be successfully addressed before our superconductor products can gain widespread commercial acceptance, and our inability to address such technological challenges could adversely affect our ability to acquire customers for our products.
Many of our products are in the early stages of commercialization and testing, while others are still under development. We do not believe any company has yet successfully developed and commercialized significant quantities of HTS wire or wire products. There are a number of technological challenges that we must successfully address to complete our development and commercialization efforts. We also believe that several years of further development in the cable and motor industries will be necessary before a substantial number of additional commercial applications for our HTS wire in these industries can be developed and proven. We may also need to improve the performance and/or reduce the cost of our HTS wire to expand the number of commercial applications for it. We may be unable to meet such technological challenges. Delays in development, as a result of technological challenges or other factors, may result in the introduction or commercial acceptance of our products later than anticipated.
The commercial uses of superconductor products are very limited today, and a widespread commercial market for our products may not develop.
To date, there has been no widespread commercial use of HTS products. Commercial acceptance of low temperature superconductor (LTS) products, other than for medical magnetic resonance imaging and superconductor magnetic energy storage products, has been significantly limited by the cooling requirements of LTS materials. Even if the technological hurdles currently limiting commercial uses of HTS and LTS products are overcome, it is uncertain whether a robust commercial market for those new and unproven products will ever develop. It is possible that the market demands we currently anticipate for our HTS and LTS products will not develop and that superconductor products will never achieve widespread commercial acceptance.
7
We have limited experience manufacturing our HTS products in commercial quantities, and failure to manufacture our HTS products in commercial quantities at acceptable costs and quality levels could impair our ability to meet customer delivery requirements.
To be financially successful, we will have to manufacture our products in commercial quantities at acceptable costs while also preserving the quality levels we have achieved in manufacturing these products in limited quantities. This presents a number of technological and engineering challenges for us. In particular, we will need to improve the manufacturing yields we are achieving in the initial stage of operation of our new manufacturing plant located in Devens, MA. We cannot make assurances that we will be successful in developing product designs and manufacturing processes that permit us to manufacture our HTS products in commercial quantities at commercially acceptable costs while preserving quality. In addition, we may incur significant unforeseen expenses in our product design and manufacturing efforts. The failure to manufacture a sufficient quantity of HTS wire at acceptable quality levels could impair our ability to meet customer delivery commitments and adversely affect our revenue and cash flow.
We have limited experience in marketing and selling our products, and our failure to effectively market and sell our products could adversely affect our revenue and cash flow.
Our management team has limited experience directing our commercialization efforts, which are essential to our future success. To date, we have only limited experience marketing and selling our products, and there are very few people anywhere who have significant experience marketing or selling superconductor products. Once our products are ready for commercial use, we will have to develop a marketing and sales organization that will effectively demonstrate the advantages of our products over both more traditional products and competing superconductor products or other technologies. We may not be successful in our efforts to market this new and unfamiliar technology, and we may not be able to establish an effective sales and distribution organization.
We may decide to enter into arrangements with third parties for the marketing or distribution of our products, including arrangements in which our products, such as HTS wire, are included as a component of a larger product, such as a motor. For example, we have a marketing and sales alliance with GE Industrial Systems giving GE the exclusive right to offer our Distributed-SMES (D-SMES) and D-VAR® product lines in the United States and South America to utilities and the right to sell industrial Power Quality-Industrial Voltage Restorers (PQ-IVR™) to one of GE’s global industrial accounts. We also have a distribution agreement with Bridex Technologies Pte, Ltd., a power system solution integrator and technology company in Singapore, whereby Bridex markets and sells our integrated power electronic systems within Asia Pacific markets. By entering into marketing and sales alliances, the financial benefits to us of commercializing our products are dependent on the efforts of others. We may not be able to enter into marketing or distribution arrangements with third parties on financially acceptable terms, and third parties may not be successful in selling our products or applications incorporating our products.
Our products face intense competition both from superconductor products developed by others and from traditional, non-superconductor products and alternative technologies, which could limit our ability to acquire or retain customers.
As we begin to market and sell our superconductor products, we will face intense competition both from competitors in the superconductor field and from vendors of traditional products and new technologies. There are many companies in the United States, Europe, Japan and China engaged in the development of HTS products, including Sumitomo Electric Industries, Intermagnetics General, European Advanced Superconductors GmbH, Fujikura, Furukawa Electric, and Innova Superconductor Technology. The superconductor industry is characterized by rapidly changing and advancing technology. Our future success will depend in large part upon our ability to keep pace with advancing HTS and LTS technology and developing industry standards. Our SMES products and integrated power electronic products, such as D-VAR®, compete with a variety of other products such as dynamic voltage restorers (DVRs), static VAR compensators (SVCs), static compensators (STATCOMS), flywheels, power electronic converters and battery-based power supply systems. Competition for our PowerModules™ includes products from Ecostar, Inverpower, SatCon, Semikron and Trace. The HTS motor and generator products that we are developing face competition from copper wire-based motors and generators,
8
and from permanent magnet motors that are being developed. Research efforts and technological advances made by others in the superconductor field or in other areas with applications to the power quality and reliability markets may render our development efforts obsolete. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources, research and development, manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we have. In addition, as the HTS wire, HTS electric motors and generators, and power electronic systems markets develop, other large industrial companies may enter those fields and compete with us. If we are unable to compete successfully, it may harm our business, which in turn may limit our ability to acquire or retain customers.
Third parties have or may acquire patents that cover the high temperature superconductor materials we use or may use in the future to manufacture our products, and our success depends on our ability to license such patents or other proprietary rights.
We expect that some or all of the HTS materials and technologies we use in designing and manufacturing our products are or will become covered by patents issued to other parties, including our competitors. If that is the case, we will need either to acquire licenses to these patents or to successfully contest the validity of these patents. The owners of these patents may refuse to grant licenses to us, or may be willing to do so only on terms that we find commercially unreasonable. If we are unable to obtain these licenses, we may have to contest the validity or scope of those patents to avoid infringement claims by the owners of these patents. It is possible that we will not be successful in contesting the validity or scope of a patent, or that we will not prevail in a patent infringement claim brought against us. Even if we are successful in such a proceeding, we could incur substantial costs and diversion of management resources in prosecuting or defending such a proceeding.
Our patents may not provide meaningful protection for our technology, which could result in us losing some or all of our market position.
We own or have licensing rights under many patents and pending patent applications. However, the patents that we own or license may not provide us with meaningful protection of our technologies and may not prevent our competitors from using similar technologies, for a variety of reasons, such as:
| • | the patent applications that we or our licensors file may not result in patents being issued; |
| • | any patents issued may be challenged by third parties; and |
| • | others may independently develop similar technologies not protected by our patents or design around the patented aspects of any technologies we develop. |
Moreover, we could incur substantial litigation costs in defending the validity of our own patents. We also rely on trade secrets and proprietary know-how to protect our intellectual property. However, our non-disclosure agreements and other safeguards may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets and other proprietary information. If the patents that we own or license or our trade secrets and proprietary know-how fail to protect our technologies, our market position may be adversely affected.
Our success is dependent upon attracting and retaining qualified personnel, and our inability to do so could significantly damage our business and prospects.
Our success will depend in large part upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified research and development, management, manufacturing, marketing and sales personnel. Hiring those persons may be especially difficult due to the specialized nature of our business.
We are particularly dependent upon the services of Dr. Gregory J. Yurek, our co-founder and our Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Dr. Alexis P. Malozemoff, our Chief Technical Officer. The loss of the services of either of those individuals could significantly damage our business and prospects.
9
Our common stock may experience extreme market price and volume fluctuations, which may prevent our stockholders from selling our common stock at a profit and could lead to costly litigation against us that could divert our management’s attention.
The market price of our common stock has historically experienced significant volatility and may continue to experience such volatility in the future. Factors such as technological achievements by us and our competitors, the establishment of development or strategic relationships with other companies, our introduction of commercial products, and our financial performance may have a significant effect on the market price of our common stock. In addition, the stock market in general, and the stock of high technology companies in particular, have in recent years experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, which are often unrelated to the performance or condition of particular companies. Such broad market fluctuations could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Due to these factors, the price of our common stock may decline and investors may be unable to resell their shares of our common stock for a profit. Following periods of volatility in the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company. If we become subject to this kind of litigation in the future, it could result in substantial litigation costs, a damages award against us and the diversion of our management’s attention.
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus, any prospectus supplement we may use in connection with this prospectus, and the documents we incorporate by reference into this prospectus contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933. For this purpose, any statements contained herein that relate to future events or conditions, including without limitation, the statements included or incorporated by reference into this prospectus regarding industry prospects and our prospective results of operations or financial position, may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. The words “believes,” “anticipates,” “plans,” “expects,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements represent management’s current expectations and are inherently uncertain. The important factors discussed above under “Risk Factors,” among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements. Any such forward-looking statements represent management’s views as of the date of the document in which such forward-looking statement is contained. While we may elect to update such forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we disclaim any obligation to do so, even if subsequent events cause our views to change.
We estimate the net proceeds to us of this offering to be approximately $50.2 million, based on an assumed offering price of $13.40 per share, the last reported sale price of our common stock on August 26, 2003 on the NASDAQ National Market, after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and the estimated offering expenses payable by us.
We intend to use the net proceeds from this offering primarily for working capital and for general corporate purposes, including the scale-up of pilot manufacturing for our 2G HTS wire.
The amounts actually spent by us for any specific purpose may vary significantly and will depend on a number of factors, including the progress of our commercialization and development efforts. Accordingly, our management has broad discretion to allocate the net proceeds. Pending the uses described above, we intend to invest the net proceeds of this offering in short-term, interest-bearing, investment-grade securities.
10
Our common stock has been quoted on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “AMSC” since 1991. The following table sets forth the high and low sale prices per share of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ National Market for the periods indicated.
| High |
Low | |||||
| Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2002 |
||||||
| First Quarter |
$ | 27.90 | $ | 10.75 | ||
| Second Quarter |
24.50 | 8.35 | ||||
| Third Quarter |
14.00 | 8.65 | ||||
| Fourth Quarter |
13.58 | 6.50 | ||||
| Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2003 |
||||||
| First Quarter |
8.87 | 3.85 | ||||
| Second Quarter |
6.05 | 2.65 | ||||
| Third Quarter |
4.24 | 2.10 | ||||
| Fourth Quarter |
5.41 | 3.02 | ||||
| Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2004 |
||||||
| First Quarter |
7.35 | 3.18 | ||||
| Second Quarter (through August 26, 2003) |
13.76 | 4.95 | ||||
A recent last reported sale price per share for our common stock on the NASDAQ National Market is set forth on the cover page of this prospectus.
We have never paid cash dividends on our common stock. We currently intend to retain earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business and do not anticipate paying cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Payment of future cash dividends, if any, will be at the discretion of our board of directors after taking into account various factors, including our financial condition, operating results, current and anticipated cash needs and plans for expansion.
11
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of June 30, 2003:
| • | on an actual basis and |
| • | on an as adjusted basis to reflect the issuance and sale of 4,000,000 shares of our common stock in this offering after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and the estimated offering expenses payable by us. |
This table excludes 5,393,255 shares of our common stock reserved as of June 30, 2003 for issuance upon exercise of outstanding options and warrants. You should read this table together with our financial statements and accompanying notes and with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.
| As of June 30, 2003 |
||||||||
| Actual |
As Adjusted |
|||||||
| (in thousands) | ||||||||
| (unaudited) | ||||||||
| Long-term debt |
— | — | ||||||
| Stockholders’ equity: |
||||||||
| Common stock, $.01 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; 21,343,720 shares issued and outstanding, actual; 25,343,720 shares issued and outstanding, as adjusted |
$ | 213 | $ | 253 | ||||
| Additional paid-in capital |
361,489 | 411,601 | ||||||
| Deferred compensation |
(596 | ) | (596 | ) | ||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive income |
8 | 8 | ||||||
| Accumulated deficit |
(281,466 | ) | (281,466 | ) | ||||
| Total stockholders’ equity |
79,648 | 129,800 | ||||||
| Total capitalization |
$ | 79,648 | $ | 129,800 | ||||
12
Our net tangible book value as of June 30, 2003 was approximately $73,816,000, or $3.46 per share. Net tangible book value per share represents our total tangible assets less our total liabilities, divided by the aggregate number of shares of our common stock outstanding. After giving effect to the sale of the 4,000,000 shares of our common stock in this offering, after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and the estimated offering expenses payable by us, our net tangible book value at June 30, 2003 would have been approximately $123,968,000 or $4.89 per share. This represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value per share of $1.43 to existing stockholders and an immediate dilution of $8.51 per share to new investors. Dilution per share represents the difference between the amount per share paid by the new investors in this offering and the net tangible book value per share at June 30, 2003, giving effect to this offering. The following table illustrates this per share dilution to new investors.
| Assumed public offering price per share |
$ | 13.40 | ||||
| Net tangible book value per share as of June 30, 2003 |
$ | 3.46 | ||||
| Increase in net tangible book value per share attributable to new investors |
1.43 | |||||
| Net tangible book value per share after this offering |
4.89 | |||||
| Dilution per share to new investors |
$ | 8.51 | ||||
These calculations assume no exercise of stock options and warrants outstanding as of June 30, 2003. As of June 30, 2003, there were options and warrants outstanding to purchase an aggregate of 5,393,255 shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $15.29 per share. To the extent all of these options and warrants had been exercised as of June 30, 2003, the dilution to new investors would be greater.
13
SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The selected consolidated financial data presented below for the fiscal years ended March 31, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements that have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, independent accountants. The selected consolidated financial data for the three months ended June 30, 2002 and 2003 and as of June 30, 2003 have been derived from our unaudited consolidated financial statements. In the opinion of our management, such unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our operating results and financial position for such periods and as of such date. Our operating results for the three months ended June 30, 2003 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire fiscal year ending March 31, 2004. The financial data presented below should be read in conjunction with the other financial information appearing elsewhere in this prospectus or incorporated by reference into this prospectus.
| Fiscal Year Ended March 31, |
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2002 |
2003 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| (in thousands, except per share data) | (unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Statement of Operations Data |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Contract revenue |
$ | 9,238 | $ | 10,439 | $ | 3,186 | $ | 2,111 | $ | 715 | $ | 131 | $ | 356 | ||||||||||||||
| Product sales and prototype development contracts |
2,019 | 4,674 | 13,582 | 9,539 | 20,305 | 2,729 | 7,400 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total revenues |
11,257 | 15,113 | 16,768 | 11,650 | 21,020 | 2,860 | 7,756 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Costs and expenses: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Costs of revenue – contract revenue |
9,225 | 10,325 | 3,135 | 2,101 | 684 | 128 | 335 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue – product sales and prototype development contracts |
2,796 | 4,369 | 10,981 | 17,299 | 31,518 | 4,231 | 8,273 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Research and development |
10,409 | 13,206 | 22,832 | 27,814 | 21,940 | 6,217 | 4,863 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Selling, general and administrative |
6,078 | 6,686 | 14,215 | 16,313 | 16,159 | 3,464 | 2,705 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Pirelli license costs |
-— | — | — | 4,010 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Restructuring charges |
-— | — | — | 5,666 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Impairment charge |
-— | — | — | — | 39,231 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Total costs and expenses |
28,508 | 34,586 | 51,163 | 73,203 | 109,532 | 14,040 | 16,176 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating loss |
(17,251 | ) | (19,473 | ) | (34,395 | ) | (61,553 | ) | (88,512 | ) | (11,180 | ) | (8,420 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Interest income |
1,921 | 1,871 | 12,555 | 4,451 | 869 | 371 | 35 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other income (expense), net |
4 | 4 | 164 | 117 | 10 | (20 | ) | 29 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (15,326 | ) | $ | (17,598 | ) | $ | (21,676 | ) | $ | (56,985 | ) | $ | (87,633 | ) | $ | (10,829 | ) | $ | (8,356 | ) | |||||||
| Net loss per common share (basic and diluted) |
$ | (1.01 | ) | $ | (1.11 | ) | $ | (1.08 | ) | $ | (2.79 | ) | $ | (4.21 | ) | $ | (0.53 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | |||||||
| Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (basic and diluted) |
15,132 | 15,820 | 20,127 | 20,409 | 20,831 | 20,535 | 21,344 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Data |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research and development expenses |
$ | 10,409 | $ | 13,206 | $ | 22,832 | $ | 27,814 | $ | 21,940 | $ | 6,217 | $ | 4,863 | ||||||||||||||
| Research and development expenditures classified as cost of revenues |
7,335 | 8,412 | 5,879 | 8,757 | 10,997 | 2,088 | 4,754 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Research and development expenditures offset by cost-sharing funding |
1,007 | 1,014 | 135 | 311 | 510 | 53 | 286 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Pro forma research and development expenses (1) |
$ | 18,751 | $ | 22,632 | $ | 28,846 | $ | 36,882 | $ | 33,447 | $ | 8,358 | $ | 9,903 | ||||||||||||||
| (1) | Pro forma research and development expenses is a non-GAAP financial measure that consists of research and development expenses plus research and development expenses related to externally funded development contracts included in costs of revenue, and research and development expenses offset by cost-sharing funding under government contracts. We believe that presenting pro forma research and development expenses provides useful information as to our aggregate research and development spending. |
14
| As of March 31, |
As of June 30, | |||||||||||||||||
| 1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2003 | |||||||||||||
| (in thousands) | (unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||
| Balance Sheet Data |
||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents and long-term marketable securities |
$ | 31,572 | $ | 218,655 | $ | 160,225 | $ | 68,200 | $ | 20,049 | $ | 12,102 | ||||||
| Working capital |
30,459 | 135,681 | 108,808 | 36,834 | 19,407 | 12,299 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets |
48,130 | 248,914 | 239,927 | 197,795 | 101,979 | 93,262 | ||||||||||||
| Total long-term debt |
— | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity |
43,958 | 240,944 | 227,564 | 172,166 | 87,819 | 79,648 | ||||||||||||
15
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
American Superconductor Corporation was founded in 1987. We are focused on developing, manufacturing and selling products using two core technologies: HTS wires and power electronic converters for electric power applications. We also assemble superconductor wires and power electronic converters into fully-integrated products, such as HTS ship propulsion motors and dynamic reactive compensation systems, which we sell or plan to sell to end users.
Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of consolidated financial statements requires that we make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experiences and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ under different assumptions or conditions.
Our accounting policies that involve the most significant judgments and estimates are as follows:
| • | Revenue recognition; |
| • | Long-term inventory and deferred revenue; |
| • | Allowance for doubtful accounts; |
| • | Long-lived assets; |
| • | Inventory accounting; |
| • | Deferred tax assets |
| • | Goodwill; and |
| • | Acquisition accounting. |
Revenue recognition. For certain arrangements, such as contracts to perform research and development and prototype development contracts, we record revenues using the percentage of completion method, measured by the relationship of costs incurred to total estimated contract costs. We follow this method since reasonably dependable estimates of the revenue and costs applicable to various stages of a contract can be made. Since many contracts extend over a long period of time, revisions in cost and funding estimates during the progress of work have the effect of adjusting earnings applicable to prior-period performance in the current period. Recognized revenues and profit or loss are subject to revisions as the contract progresses to completion. Revisions in profit or loss estimates are charged to income in the period in which the facts that give rise to the revision become known.
We recognize revenue from product sales upon shipment, installation or acceptance, where applicable, provided persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the sales price is fixed or determinable and the collectibility is reasonably assured, or for some programs, on the percentage of completion method of accounting. When other significant obligations remain after products are delivered, revenue is recognized only after such obligations (including buyback provisions) are fulfilled.
Long-term inventory and deferred revenue. Long-term inventory of $3,250,000 represents superconductor magnetic energy storage (SMES) units that were delivered in fiscal 2001 to one of our customers, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS), for a total purchase price of $3,787,000, less $537,000 recorded as revenue in the quarter ended December 31, 2002. As the sale of these units is subject to certain return and buyback provisions which expire from 2002 to 2009, we are deferring recognition of the revenue related to the remaining $3,250,000 in sales until the applicable buyback provisions lapse. Long-term deferred revenue of $3,250,000 represents the $3,787,000 cash payment received from WPS related to this transaction, less $537,000 recorded as revenue in the
16
third quarter of fiscal 2003. The buyback provisions, which are subject to a minimum six-month written notice requirement, began to lapse in the quarter ended December 31, 2002, until which time WPS had the right to return all the units for the full purchase price of $3,787,000. On December 31 of each year after 2002, WPS has the right, subject to a minimum six-month notice requirement, to sell the units back to us at a reduced price. Between January 1, 2003 and the next annual buyback date of December 31, 2003, the repurchase price for the units will be $3,250,000 and that price is further reduced by approximately 12% per year through December 31, 2009. We recorded $537,000 of revenue and an equal amount of cost of revenue in the quarter ended December 31, 2002, as the buyback price transitioned from $3,787,000 to $3,250,000. We also recorded a $537,000 reduction in long-term inventory and long-term deferred revenue.
Allowance for doubtful accounts. If the financial condition of our customers were to deteriorate, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make payments, additional provisions for bad debt allowances may be required.
Long-Lived Assets. We periodically evaluate our long-lived assets for potential impairment under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. We perform these evaluations whenever events or circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of an asset or group of assets is not recoverable. Our judgments regarding the existence of impairment indicators are based on market and operational performance. Indicators of potential impairment include:
| • | a significant change in the manner in which an asset is used; |
| • | a significant decrease in the market value of an asset; |
| • | a significant adverse change in its business or the industry in which it is sold; |
| • | a current period operating cash flow loss combined with a history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the asset; and |
| • | significant advances in our technologies that require changes in our manufacturing process. |
If we believe an indicator of potential impairment exists, we test to determine whether impairment recognition criteria in SFAS No. 144 have been met. To analyze a potential impairment, we project undiscounted future cash flows over the remaining life of the asset or the primary asset in the asset group. If these projected cash flows are less than the carrying amount, an impairment loss is recognized based on the fair value of the asset or asset group less any costs of disposition. Evaluating the impairment requires judgment by our management to estimate future operating results and cash flows. If different estimates were used, the amount and timing of asset impairments could be affected. We charge impairments of the long-lived assets to operations if our evaluations indicate that the carrying values of these assets are not recoverable.
In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003 ended March 31, 2003, we recorded a $39,231,000 impairment charge to write down our first generation (1G) HTS wire asset group, primarily comprised of the Devens, MA manufacturing facility and capital equipment, to an estimated fair value.
Inventory accounting. We write down inventory for estimated obsolescence or unmarketable inventory in an amount equal to the difference between the cost of the inventory and the estimated realizable value based upon assumptions of future demand and market conditions. If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected, additional inventory write-downs may be required.
Deferred tax assets. We have recorded a full valuation allowance to reduce our deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. While we consider future taxable income and tax planning strategies in assessing the need for the valuation allowance, if management were to determine that we would be able to realize deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would increase income in the period such determination was made.
17
Goodwill. Goodwill represents the excess of cost over net assets of acquired businesses that are consolidated. Pursuant to SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, goodwill is not amortized. In lieu of amortization, we perform an impairment review of our goodwill at least annually or when events and changes in circumstances indicate the need for such a detailed impairment loss analysis, as prescribed by SFAS No. 142. To date, we have determined that goodwill is not impaired, but we could in the future determine that goodwill is impaired, which would result in a charge to earnings.
Acquisition accounting. We account for our acquisitions under the purchase method of accounting pursuant to SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations. In June 2000, we acquired in a business combination substantially all of the assets of Integrated Electronics, LLC (IE), as well as IE’s employees and facility lease. The IE acquisition was accounted for under the purchase method of accounting. Goodwill of $1,329,282 represented the excess of the purchase price of $1,833,125 over the fair value of the acquired assets of $503,843 at June 1, 2000. Goodwill was $1,107,735 at June 30, 2003 and March 31, 2003.
Impairment/Other Charges (Fiscal Year 2003)
For fiscal 2003, we recorded a $39,231,000 impairment charge primarily on our building and equipment assets at our Devens, MA manufacturing facility, in connection with our plans to transition over the next three or four years to a lower cost, second generation (2G) HTS wire manufacturing methodology. The impairment charge was recorded in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.
A number of factors indicated a potential impairment of the asset group, including substantial operating losses incurred and projected future losses associated with the AMSC Wires business segment, our intent to transition to the manufacture of 2G HTS wire within the next several years and our market capitalization being less than the net book value for a significant period. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003, we revised our analysis of the probable timing of the transition to 2G HTS wire, determining that the transition would be accelerated over previous expectations. The acceleration of the timing of the transition was the principal factor indicating a potential impairment.
In addition, we recorded other charges in March 2003 of $3,421,000 relating to an increase in magnet inventory reserves at our Power Electronic Systems business unit in Wisconsin, which was reported in Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts, and $2,624,000 relating to an increase in the allowance for doubtful accounts to cover a Power Electronics System receivable which was reported under Selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expense. We are continuing our efforts to collect this receivable.
Restructuring/Pirelli/Other Charges (Fiscal Year 2002)
In March 2002, we announced a series of restructuring, consolidation and cost-cutting measures to create a more streamlined and flatter organization aimed at reducing our cost structure as we drive to commercialize our technologies and products. The restructuring resulted in the reduction of 99 full-time employees across all business functions at our Massachusetts and Wisconsin locations. Our Power Quality and Reliability business unit, based in Middleton, WI, and Power Electronics business unit, based in New Berlin, WI, were combined into a new business unit called Power Electronic Systems. This change leveraged personnel with similar skills in the two business units and significantly reduced the cost structure. As part of the restructuring, we also announced that we will outsource our future requirements for low temperature superconductor (LTS) magnets used in our SMES systems and as a result, we discontinued operations in one of our two buildings in Middleton, WI that compromises approximately 27,000 square feet. Cash payments related to the workforce reduction were substantially completed in the first quarter of fiscal 2003. Exit costs related to the leased facility are being incurred over the 18-month period ending in December 2003. In addition to restructuring charges of $5,666,000 we recorded other charges in March 2002 of $727,000 relating to an increase in allowance for doubtful accounts, $3,464,000 for a magnet inventory write-down and $4,010,000 relating to a license agreement with Pirelli to allow us to sell our HTS wire to other cable manufacturers in addition to Pirelli.
18
Results of Operations
Quarters Ended June 30, 2003 and June 30, 2002
We have three reportable business segments—AMSC Wires, SuperMachines, and Power Electronic Systems.
The AMSC Wires business segment develops, manufactures and sells HTS wire. The focus of this segment’s current development, manufacturing and sales efforts is on HTS wire for power transmission cables, motors, generators, synchronous condensers and specialty magnets.
The SuperMachines business segment is developing and commercializing electric motors, generators, and synchronous condensers based on HTS wire. Its primary focus for motors and generators is on ship propulsion.
The Power Electronic Systems business segment develops and sells power electronic converters and designs, manufactures and sells integrated systems based on those converters for power quality and reliability solutions and for wind farm applications.
Revenues
Total revenues during the three months ended June 30, 2003 were $7,756,000, a 171% increase compared to the $2,860,000 of revenue recorded for the same period a year earlier.
The increase in consolidated revenues of $4,896,000 was mainly the result of an increase in prototype development contract revenues, primarily relating to work performed on the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Research 36.5 Megawatt (MW) motor program. Revenues in our SuperMachines business unit increased by $4,014,000 to $5,550,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 from $1,536,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2002. Approximately 88%, or $4,878,000, of this business unit’s first-quarter revenues related to the performance of design work on the 36.5 MW motor program, which began in March 2003. The remainder of SuperMachines’ revenue related to the completion of work on the 5 MW motor, which was delivered to the U.S. Navy in July 2003, and to work performed on the SuperVAR™ synchronous condenser prototype being developed for the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). SuperMachines’ revenues in the prior-year quarter were exclusively related to the 5 MW motor program.
Revenues in our AMSC Wires business unit increased by $879,000 to $1,097,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 from $218,000 for the same period of the prior year. The growth in revenues in AMSC Wires in the first quarter of fiscal 2004, compared to the prior-year first quarter, was attributable to two factors. Product sales increased by $654,000 to $741,000 in the quarter ended June 30, 2003 from $87,000 in the prior-year quarter, due to a higher level of 1G wire sales, our first delivery of 2G HTS wire to a customer, and the beginning of work on a project to install an HTS power cable in the transmission grid of the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). Contract revenues also grew by $225,000 to $356,000 from $131,000 due to a higher level of work performed on two Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grants with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Institutes of Health, both focused on 2G HTS wire development.
Revenues in our Power Electronic Systems business unit were $1,109,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 compared to $1,106,000 for the same period of the prior year. An increase in product sales due to the delivery of one D-VAR® system was offset by a lower level of prototype development contract revenues on our ongoing Power Electronic Building Blocks (PEBB) program with the U.S. Navy.
For the three months ended June 30, 2003, we recorded approximately $313,000 in funding under two government cost-sharing agreements with the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Department of Commerce. For the three months ended June 30, 2002, we recorded approximately $103,000 of funding under the U.S. Air Force agreement. We anticipate that a portion of our funding in the future will continue to come from cost-sharing agreements as we continue to develop joint programs with government agencies. Funding from government cost-
19
sharing agreements is recorded as an offset to research and development and selling, general and administrative expenses, as required by government contract accounting guidelines, rather than as revenues.
Costs and expenses
Total costs and expenses for the quarter ended June 30, 2003 were $16,176,000 compared to $14,040,000 for the same period last year.
Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts increased by $4,042,000 to $8,273,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2003, compared to $4,231,000 for the same period of the prior year. This increase was directly related to the higher level of prototype development contract revenues with the U.S. Navy in the SuperMachines business unit. Also contributing to this increase was a $272,000 increase in costs (including building and equipment depreciation) related to the AMSC Wires business unit’s growing utilization of the Devens, MA manufacturing plant. Costs of revenue—contract revenue increased by $208,000 to $336,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2003, compared to $128,000 for the same period of the prior year. Costs of revenue—contract revenue increased proportionally with the higher level of contract revenue, particularly with regard to two Phase II SBIR grants with the DOE and National Institute of Health.
Our research and development (R&D) expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||
| 2003 |
2002 | |||||
| R&D expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 4,863,000 | $ | 6,217,000 | ||
| R&D expenditures classified as Costs of revenue |
4,754,000 | 2,088,000 | ||||
| R&D expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
286,000 | 53,000 | ||||
| Pro forma R&D expenses |
$ | 9,903,000 | $ | 8,358,000 | ||
R&D expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) decreased to $4,863,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2003 from $6,217,000 for the same period last year. This amount decreased in the first three months of fiscal year 2004 when compared to the same period of 2003 as a result of a higher percentage of the R&D costs being classified as costs of revenue due to the higher level of funded prototype development contract work in SuperMachines. Pro forma R&D expenses, which include amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, increased to $9,903,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2003 from $8,358,000 for the same period last year. The increase in pro forma R&D spending in the first quarter of fiscal 2004, compared to the prior-year quarter, was the result of a $1,920,000 increase in material, subcontractor, and temporary labor costs in the SuperMachines business unit. This increase was partially offset by reduced R&D spending in the AMSC Wires and Power Electronic Systems business units, primarily due to headcount reductions in those two business units over the last year. A portion of the R&D expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as R&D expenses). Additionally, a portion of R&D expenses was offset by cost sharing funding.
Our SG&A expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Three Months Ended | ||||||
| 2003 |
2002 | |||||
| SG&A expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 2,705,000 | $ | 3,464,000 | ||
| SG&A expenditures classified as Costs of revenue |
1,524,000 | 309,000 | ||||
| SG&A expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
27,000 | 50,000 | ||||
| Pro forma SG&A expenses |
$ | 4,256,000 | $ | 3,823,000 | ||
SG&A expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) decreased to $2,705,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2003 from $3,464,000 for the same period last year.
20
This amount decreased in the first three months of fiscal year 2004 when compared to the same period of 2003 as a result of a higher percentage of the SG&A costs being classified as costs of revenue due to the higher level of funded prototype development contract work in SuperMachines. Pro forma SG&A expenses, which include amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, increased to $4,256,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2003, compared to $3,823,000 for the same period last year. This increase was primarily the result of a higher percentage of the rent and occupancy costs associated with our Westborough, MA headquarters now being classified as general and administrative expense rather than in costs of revenue — product sales and prototype development contracts and research and development expense. We have completed the relocation of our manufacturing workforce to Devens, MA from Westborough, MA, which is now partially unoccupied. A portion of the SG&A expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as SG&A expenses). Additionally, a portion of SG&A expenses was offset by cost sharing funding.
We present pro forma R&D and pro forma SG&A expenses, which are non-GAAP financial measures, because we believe this presentation provides useful information on our aggregate R&D and SG&A spending.
Non-operating expenses/Interest income
Interest income decreased to $35,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2003 from $371,000 in the same period of the prior year. This decrease in interest income reflects the lower cash balances available for investment as a result of cash being used to fund our operations and to purchase property, plant and equipment, as well as lower interest rates available on our investments. Other income (expense), net of $29,000 in the three months ended June 30, 2003 consisted primarily of gains from the sale of certain pieces of surplus equipment. Other income (expense), net of ($20,000) in the three months ended June 30, 2002 reflected taxes on investment income.
We expect to continue to incur operating losses until at least the end of the fiscal year ending March 31, 2005 as we continue to devote significant financial resources to our research and development activities and commercialization efforts.
Fiscal Years Ended March 31, 2003 and March 31, 2002
Revenues
Total consolidated revenues increased to $21,020,000 in fiscal 2003 from $11,650,000 in fiscal 2002, an increase of $9,370,000 or 80.4%.
| Year Ended March 31, | ||||||
| Revenues |
2003 |
2002 | ||||
| Power Electronic Systems |
$ | 10,934,000 | $ | 1,416,000 | ||
| SuperMachines |
6,125,000 | 5,840,000 | ||||
| AMSC Wires |
3,961,000 | 4,394,000 | ||||
| Total |
$ | 21,020,000 | $ | 11,650,000 | ||
Power Electronic Systems business unit sales, which include D-VAR® integrated power electronic systems and power electronic converters, were $10,934,000 in fiscal 2003 compared to $1,416,000 in fiscal 2002, an increase of $9,518,000. Power Electronic Systems sales for fiscal 2003 included multiple D-VAR® system sales to Northeast Utilities and Rayburn Electric, and additional system sales to BC Hydro and Pacificorp, compared to one D-VAR® sale in fiscal 2002 to the TVA. In addition, the Power Electronics Systems business unit recognized $2,121,000 of prototype development contract revenues in connection with work performed on our U.S. Navy contract on PEBB in fiscal 2003, compared to $197,000 in fiscal 2002.
21
Our SuperMachines business unit recognized revenues of $6,125,000 in fiscal 2003, an increase of $285,000 or 4.9% over fiscal 2002 revenues of $5,840,000. This was the result of higher prototype development contract revenues associated with fiscal 2003 work performed on the 5 MW and 36.5 MW HTS motor contracts with the U.S. Navy, the second of which was awarded in March 2003. On March 3, 2003, we announced the receipt of a three-year $70 million contract from the U.S. Navy for the delivery of a 36.5 MW HTS propulsion motor for electric warships. In the first month of work on this incrementally funded contract, we recognized revenues of $1,185,000 on the 36.5 MW motor program. We expect SuperMachines business unit revenues to be significantly higher in fiscal 2004 (ending March 31, 2004) than they were in fiscal 2003, based on the receipt of this new cost plus incentive fee contract from the U.S. Navy. As of March 31, 2003, incremental funding of $14,348,000 had been allotted to this contract.
Revenues in our AMSC Wires business unit were $3,961,000 in fiscal 2003 compared to $4,394,000 in fiscal 2002, a decrease of $433,000 or 9.9% caused primarily by a $1,396,000 reduction in contract revenues, partially offset by a $963,000 increase in product sales in fiscal 2003. Pirelli Energy Cables and Systems provided us with $1,500,000 of research and development funding in fiscal 2002, but no funding in fiscal 2003, causing the decline in contract revenues. This discontinuance of Pirelli funding in fiscal 2003 was the result of a license agreement signed with Pirelli in February 2002 which allows us to sell our HTS wire to other cable manufacturers in addition to Pirelli. AMSC Wires’ product sales were $3,246,000 in fiscal 2003, compared to $2,283,000 in fiscal 2002. The $963,000 increase in AMSC Wires’ product sales in fiscal 2003 was driven by higher sales of HTS wire in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. We expect product sales to continue to increase in this business unit in fiscal 2004 as a result of our selection by the DOE in April 2003 as the prime contractor for an HTS power transmission cable project in the LIPA power grid. Net of cost share, we expect our AMSC Wires business unit to record approximately $15,200,000 in revenue (of which approximately $10,700,000 will be awarded to subcontractors) from this project during the period April 2003 through approximately April 2006.
In addition to reported revenues, we also received funding of $764,000 in fiscal 2003 under two government cost-sharing agreements, compared to $603,000 in fiscal 2002. Funding from government cost-sharing agreements is recorded as an offset to R&D and SG&A expenses, as required by government contract accounting guidelines, rather than as revenue. We anticipate that a portion of our funding in the future will continue to come from cost-sharing agreements as we continue to develop joint programs with government agencies. We expect cost sharing funding to continue to increase in fiscal 2004 as compared to fiscal 2003 based on the November 2002 receipt of a $2,000,000, two-year contract from the U.S. Department of Commerce, under which we recorded $238,000 of cost sharing funding in fiscal 2003.
Costs and expenses
Total costs and expenses for the year ended March 31, 2003 were $109,532,000 compared to $73,203,000 for the prior year, an increase of $36,329,000. These costs and expenses included $45,276,000 of non-cash charges recorded in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003 related to an asset impairment, an inventory write-down and an increase in the allowance for doubtful accounts. Fiscal 2002 costs and expenses included $13,867,000 of charges related to the restructuring and product line consolidation implemented in March 2002 and to the purchase of a license from Pirelli in February 2002. Costs and expenses exclusive of the above referenced impairment and other charges, which are non-GAAP measures, were $64,256,000 in fiscal 2003 and $59,336,000 in fiscal 2002. This increase of $4,920,000 was primarily due to materials and other outside costs associated with the higher level of fiscal 2003 revenues. We present costs and expenses exclusive of impairment and other charges because we believe this presentation provides investors with a useful view of our operating results by isolating certain charges and describing our performance without them.
Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts increased by $14,219,000 to $31,518,000 in fiscal 2003, compared to $17,299,000 in fiscal 2002, due to higher fiscal 2003 revenues, particularly in the Power Electronic Systems business unit, and the costs related to the AMSC Wires business unit’s occupancy of the Devens, MA manufacturing facility. Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype
22
development contracts in Power Electronics Systems increased by $6,121,000 due to higher systems shipments. Devens-related costs (including building and equipment depreciation) increased by $6,428,000 in fiscal 2003 compared to fiscal 2002, when Devens costs were just beginning to be incurred. Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts also increased due to the higher level of product sales in the AMSC Wires business unit and the higher level of prototype development contract revenues in SuperMachines. Costs of revenue—contract revenue decreased proportionally with the lower level of contract revenue.
Pro forma R&D expenses, which include amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, decreased by $3,435,000 to $33,447,000 in fiscal 2003, compared to $36,882,000 in fiscal 2002. This decrease was primarily the result of reduced R&D spending in the AMSC Wires and Power Electronic Systems business units of $3,096,000 and $2,315,000, respectively, related to the reduction in force implemented as part of our March 2002 restructuring, and additional headcount reductions taken in January 2003. These decreases in R&D spending were partially offset by higher R&D spending, both internally and externally funded, in the SuperMachines business unit of $1,976,000. A portion of the R&D expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as R&D expenses). Additionally, a portion of R&D expenses was offset by cost sharing funding. Net R&D expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as costs of revenues and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) decreased to $21,940,000 in fiscal 2003 from $27,814,000 in fiscal 2002.
Our R&D expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Year Ended March 31, | ||||||
| 2003 |
2002 | |||||
| R&D expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 21,940,000 | $ | 27,814,000 | ||
| R&D expenditures on development contracts classified as Costs of revenue |
10,997,000 | 8,757,000 | ||||
| R&D expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
510,000 | 311,000 | ||||
| Pro forma R&D expenses |
$ | 33,447,000 | $ | 36,882,000 | ||
Pro forma SG&A expenses, which include amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, decreased by $368,000 to $17,896,000 in fiscal 2003, compared to $18,264,000 in fiscal 2002. This decrease was primarily the result of the reductions in force implemented as part of our March 2002 restructuring, and additional headcount reductions taken in January 2003, partially offset by the $2,624,000 increase in the allowance for doubtful accounts recorded in March of 2003. A portion of the SG&A expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as SG&A expenses). Additionally, a portion of SG&A expenses was offset by cost sharing funding. Net SG&A expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) was $16,159,000 in fiscal 2003 compared to $16,313,000 in the prior year.
Our SG&A expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Year Ended March 31, | ||||||
| 2003 |
2002 | |||||
| SG&A expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 16,159,000 | $ | 16,313,000 | ||
| SG&A expenditures on contracts classified as Costs of Revenue |
1,482,000 | 1,659,000 | ||||
| SG&A expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
255,000 | 292,000 | ||||
| Pro forma SG&A expenses |
$ | 17,896,000 | $ | 18,264,000 | ||
We present pro forma R&D and pro forma SG&A expenses, which are non-GAAP measures, because we believe this presentation provides useful information on our aggregate R&D and SG&A spending.
23
Impairment/Restructuring/Pirelli
An impairment charge was recorded in fiscal 2003 of $39,231,000 primarily on our building and equipment assets at our Devens, MA manufacturing facility, in connection with our plans to transition over the next several years to a lower cost, 2G HTS wire manufacturing methodology.
In fiscal 2002 we recorded $5,666,000 in restructuring charges and an additional $4,010,000 charge relating to a Pirelli license cost.
Non-operating expenses/Interest income
Interest income decreased to $869,000 in fiscal 2003 from $4,451,000 in fiscal 2002. This decrease in interest income reflects the lower cash balances available for investment as a result of cash being used to fund our operations and to purchase property, plant and equipment, as well as lower interest rates available on our investments. Other income (expense), net was $10,000 in fiscal 2003, compared to $117,000 in fiscal 2002, consisting primarily of investment gains from long-term marketable securities.
We expect to continue to incur operating losses until the end of fiscal 2005, as we continue to devote significant financial resources to our research and development activities and commercialization efforts.
We expect to be party to agreements which, from time to time, may result in costs incurred exceeding expected revenues under such contracts. We may enter into such agreements for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to, entering into new product application areas, furthering the development of key technologies, and advancing the demonstration of commercial prototypes in critical market applications.
Fiscal Years Ended March 31, 2002 and March 31, 2001
Revenues
Total revenues declined to $11,650,000 in fiscal 2002 (ended March 31, 2002) from $16,768,000 in fiscal 2001, a decrease of $5,118,000. Power Electronic Systems business unit sales, which include SMES systems and power electronic converters, were $1,416,000 in fiscal 2002 compared to $9,315,000 in fiscal 2001, a decrease of $7,899,000. Lower SMES system sales were primarily attributable to adverse economic conditions and uncertain conditions in the electric power industry, which have led to significant delays in orders for capital goods. Revenues from our AMSC Wires business unit were $4,394,000, a $551,000 decrease from prior year. AMSC Wires product sales increased by $258,000 while revenues derived from research contracts with Pirelli and the U.S. Government declined by $809,000. SuperMachines business unit revenues increased $3,332,000 to $5,840,000 as a result of an increase in prototype development contract revenue with the U.S. Navy.
In addition to reported revenues, we also received funding of $603,000 in fiscal 2002 under a government cost-sharing agreement with the U.S. Air Force, compared to $262,000 in fiscal 2001. Funding from government cost-sharing agreements is recorded as an offset to research and development and SG&A expenses, as required by government contract accounting guidelines, rather than as revenue.
Costs and expenses
Total costs and expenses for the year ended March 31, 2002 were $73,203,000 compared to $51,163,000 for the prior year. These costs and expenses included $13,867,000 of charges recorded in the fourth quarter related to the restructuring and product line consolidation implemented in March 2002 and the purchase of a license from Pirelli Energy Cables and Systems announced in February 2002. The restructuring costs of $5,666,000 included $1,549,000 of severance and related costs, $2,826,000 of production and test equipment write-offs related to the decision to outsource magnet requirements for SMES products, $691,000 of facility exit costs, and $600,000 of cancelled purchase commitments. We recorded a one-time charge of $4,010,000 relating to the new license
24
agreement from Pirelli to allow us to sell HTS wire to other cable manufacturers in addition to Pirelli. Included in SG&A was a $727,000 increase in the allowance for doubtful account reserve related to the product line consolidation. Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts included $3,464,000 related to a magnet inventory reserve associated with the Power Electronic Systems business unit restructuring. Costs of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts also increased due to the higher level of SuperMachines prototype development contract revenues with the U.S. Navy and increased AMSC Wires product sales, partially offset by lower cost of sales associated with decreased SMES system sales. Costs of revenue—contract revenue decreased proportionally with the lower level of contract revenue.
Pro forma R&D expenses, which include amounts classified as costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, increased to $36,882,000 in fiscal 2002, compared to $28,846,000 in fiscal 2001. These increases were due to the continued scale-up of our internal research and development activities, particularly in the areas of multi-filamentary composite wire scale-up and power electronic converters, including the hiring of additional personnel and the purchases of materials and equipment, and higher spending on licenses, consultants and outside contractors. A portion of the R&D expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as R&D expenses). Additionally, a portion of R&D expenses was offset by cost sharing funding. Net R&D expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as Costs of revenues and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) increased to $27,814,000 in fiscal 2002 from $22,832,000 in fiscal 2001.
Our R&D expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Year Ended March 31, | ||||||
| 2002 |
2001 | |||||
| R&D expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 27,814,000 | $ | 22,832,000 | ||
| R&D expenditures on development contracts classified as Costs of revenue |
8,757,000 | 5,879,000 | ||||
| R&D expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
311,000 | 135,000 | ||||
| Pro forma R&D expenses |
$ | 36,882,000 | $ | 28,846,000 | ||
Pro forma SG&A expenses, which include amounts classified as Costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding, increased to $18,264,000 in fiscal 2002 from $16,163,000 in the prior year. These increases were primarily due to the hiring of additional personnel and related expenses incurred to support corporate development, marketing, and recruiting activities and future planned growth, and an increase in the allowance for doubtful accounts. A portion of the SG&A expenditures related to externally funded development contracts has been classified as costs of revenue (rather than as SG&A expenses). Additionally, a portion of SG&A expenses was offset by cost sharing funding. Net SG&A expenses (exclusive of amounts classified as Costs of revenue and amounts offset by cost sharing funding) was $16,313,000 in fiscal 2002 compared to $14,215,000 in the prior year.
Our SG&A expenditures are summarized as follows:
| Year Ended March 31, | ||||||
| 2002 |
2001 | |||||
| SG&A expenses per Consolidated Statements of Operations |
$ | 16,313,000 | $ | 14,215,000 | ||
| SG&A expenditures on development contracts classified as Costs of revenue |
1,659,000 | 1,821,000 | ||||
| SG&A expenditures offset by cost sharing funding |
292,000 | 127,000 | ||||
| Pro forma SG&A expenses |
$ | 18,264,000 | $ | 16,163,000 | ||
We present pro forma R&D and pro forma SG&A expenses, which are non-GAAP measures, because we believe this presentation provides useful information on our aggregate R&D and SG&A spending.
25
Non-operating expenses/Interest income
Interest income decreased to $4,451,000 in fiscal 2002 from $12,555,000 in fiscal 2001. This decrease in interest income reflects the lower cash balances available for investment as a result of cash being used to fund our operations and to purchase property, plant and equipment, as well as lower interest rates available on our investments. Other income (expense), net of $117,000 in fiscal 2002 consists primarily of investment gains from long-term marketable securities.
Consolidated Quarterly Results of Operations
The following table summarizes our quarterly consolidated results of operations for the five quarters ended June 30, 2003. In the opinion of our management, these financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our operating results for such periods. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for any future period.
| Three Months Ended |
||||||||||||||||||||
| 2002 |
2002 |
2002 |
2003 |
2003 |
||||||||||||||||
| (in thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Statement of Operations Data |
(unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Revenues: |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Contract revenue |
$ | 131 | 158 | 116 | 310 | $ | 356 | |||||||||||||
| Product sales and prototype development contracts |
2,729 | 4,322 | 2,635 | 10,619 | 7,400 | |||||||||||||||
| Total revenues |
2,860 | 4,480 | 2,751 | 10,929 | 7,756 | |||||||||||||||
| Costs and expenses: |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Costs of revenue—contract revenue |
128 | 210 | 93 | 253 | 335 | |||||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue—product sales and prototype development contracts |
4,231 | 5,870 | 5,946 | 15,471 | 8,273 | |||||||||||||||
| Research and development |
6,217 | 5,609 | 6,021 | 4,093 | 4,863 | |||||||||||||||
| Selling, general and administrative |
3,464 | 3,292 | 3,496 | 5,907 | 2,705 | |||||||||||||||
| Impairment charge |
— | — | — | 39,231 | — | |||||||||||||||
| Total costs and expenses |
14,040 | 14,981 | 15,556 | 64,955 | 16,176 | |||||||||||||||
| Operating loss |
(11,180 | ) | (10,501 | ) | (12,805 | ) | (54,026 | ) | (8,420 | ) | ||||||||||
| Interest income |
371 | 255 | 193 | 50 | 35 | |||||||||||||||
| Other income (expense), net |
(20 | ) | 24 | (3 | ) | 9 | 29 | |||||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (10,829 | ) | $ | (10,222 | ) | $ | (12,615 | ) | $ | (53,967 | ) | $ | (8,356 | ) | |||||
| Net loss per common shares (basic and diluted) |
$ | (0.53 | ) | $ | (0.50 | ) | $ | (0.60 | ) | $ | (2.54 | ) | $ | (0.39 | ) | |||||
| Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (basic and diluted) |
20,535 | 20,571 | 21,000 | 21,222 | 21,344 | |||||||||||||||
Liquidity and Capital Resources
At June 30, 2003, we had cash, cash equivalents and long-term marketable securities of $12,101,000 compared to $20,049,000 at March 31, 2003. The principal uses of cash during the three months ended June 30, 2003 were $6,964,000 for the funding of our operations and $890,000 for the acquisition of equipment, primarily for our 2G wire process equipment.
We have potential funding commitments (excluding amounts included in accounts receivable) of approximately $87,440,000 to be received after June 30, 2003 from government and commercial customers, compared to $78,336,000 at March 31, 2003 and $10,891,000 at June 30, 2002. However, these current funding commitments, including $78,816,000 on U.S. government contracts, are subject to certain standard cancellation provisions. Additionally, several of our government contracts are being funded incrementally, and as such, are subject to the future authorization and appropriation of government funding on an annual basis. We have a history of successful performance under incrementally-funded contracts with the U.S. government.
26
Included in our current potential funding commitment amount is $60,548,000 relating to the U.S. Navy 36.5 MW motor contract, which represents the total base program value (excluding certain potential performance-based incentive fees) of $66,611,000, less the $6,063,000 of revenue recognized for the program through June 30, 2003.
Of the current commitment amount of $87,440,000 as of June 30, 2003, approximately 43% is billable to and potentially collectable from our customers within the next 12 months.
The possibility exists that we may pursue acquisition and joint venture opportunities in the future that may affect liquidity and capital resource requirements.
To date, inflation and foreign exchange have not had a material impact on our financial results.
We have generated operating losses since our inception in 1987 and expect to continue incurring losses until at least the end of fiscal 2005. Operating losses for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2003, 2002 and 2001 have contributed to net cash used by operating activities of $39,604,957, $26,456,387 and $26,424,059, respectively, for these periods. For the three months ended June 30, 2003, net cash used by operating activities was $6,964,107. Our average annual use of cash over this period is greater than our balance of cash, cash equivalents and long-term marketable securities at June 30, 2003 of $12,101,885.
In July 2003, we implemented approximately $5,000,000 of reductions in our operating and capital budgets for fiscal 2004, primarily through the elimination of 34 positions, including a reduction in force of 23 employees, or 8% of our workforce. Cuts were also made in controllable expenses and capital equipment purchase plans.
The cash savings from the aforementioned cost reduction actions combined with an increasing level of revenues for the remainder of the fiscal year are expected to lower our quarterly cash usage beginning in the second quarter of fiscal 2004. The revenue increase is supported by our receipt in March 2003 of the three-year 36.5 MW motor contract from the U.S. Navy as well as our selection in April 2003 by the DOE as the prime contractor for an HTS cable project with LIPA.
To supplement our anticipated cash needs for operations as well as our planned scale-up of pilot manufacturing for our 2G HTS wire, we have been examining a number of options for raising additional capital. Based on these efforts over the last year, in June 2003 we signed non-binding letters of intent with three groups of investors to provide up to $50 million in debt financing. This proposed financing transaction also included equity-related components including $10 million of subordinated notes that would be convertible into our common stock as well as warrants that would be issued to each of the prospective lenders. On August 25, 2003, we announced that we had decided not to pursue this proposed debt financing transaction and instead pursue a public offering of our common stock.
In the event that the stock offering contemplated by this prospectus is not completed, we are confident that we could obtain conventional mortgage financing on our Devens, MA manufacturing facility that, combined with our available cash, cash equivalents and long-term marketable securities, would be sufficient to satisfy our anticipated cash requirements through at least June 30, 2004.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In January 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 46 (FIN 46), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities. In general, a variable interest entity is a corporation, partnership, trust or any other legal structure used for business purposes that either (a) does not have equity investors with voting rights or (b) has equity investors that do not provide sufficient financial resources for the entity to support its activities. A variable interest entity often holds financial assets, including loans or receivables, real estate or other property. Variable interest entities have been commonly referred to as special-purpose entities or off-balance sheet structures. This Interpretation requires a variable interest entity to be consolidated by a company if that company is subject to a majority of the risk of loss
27
from the variable interest entity’s activities or entitled to receive a majority of the entity’s residual returns or both. We do not expect that this Interpretation will have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
In May 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity. This accounting standard establishes standards for classifying and measuring certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity. It requires that certain financial instruments that were previously classified as equity now be classified as a liability. This accounting standard is effective for financial instruments entered into or modified after May 31, 2003, and otherwise at the beginning of the first interim period beginning after June 15, 2003. We do not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 150 will have an impact on our financial position or results of operations.
28
Overview
We are a leading electricity solutions company. We develop solutions and manufacture products to dramatically improve the cost, efficiency and reliability of systems that generate, deliver and use electric power. Our products include high temperature superconductor, or HTS, wire for electric power, transportation, medical and industrial processing applications; motors and generators based on our HTS wire for ship propulsion and industrial uses, as well as synchronous condensers for transmission and distribution grid reliability; and advanced power electronic and HTS systems that ensure the quality and reliability of electricity for residential, commercial and industrial end users. Our HTS wire carries direct current, or DC, without any loss of electrical power, resulting in high electrical efficiency. Our HTS wire also conducts more than 140 times the electrical current of copper wire of the same dimensions, which dramatically reduces the size and weight of electrical equipment made with our HTS wire and significantly increases the power throughput of power cables. Our current and planned products are sold or planned to be sold to electric utilities and transmission and distribution grid operators, electrical equipment manufacturers, industrial power users and shipbuilders that utilize electric motors for ship propulsion systems. Our technology and products are backed by an intellectual property portfolio that includes more than 420 patents and patent applications owned by us worldwide and more than 380 patents and patent applications licensed from others worldwide.
Our products, and those sold by others who incorporate our products, can:
| • | increase the reliability and power transfer capacity of the electricity transmission and distribution power grid; |
| • | improve the quality of electric power delivered to manufacturing plants; |
| • | reduce the manufacturing and operating costs of primary electrical equipment, including motors and generators; |
| • | reduce the size and weight of power cables, motors, generators, and other electric power equipment; and |
| • | conserve energy resources used to produce electricity, such as oil, gas and coal, by more efficiently conducting and converting electricity into useful forms. |
We believe there will be significant market demand for our products because of the following factors:
| • | demand for electric power continues to grow on a global basis; |
| • | the power grids in the U.S. and in many developed nations face severe constraints in adequately and safely delivering the amounts of power demanded by electric power users; |
| • | power reliability and power quality are increasingly important as economies transition to computerized and digitized systems; |
| • | U.S. domestic policy is now addressing the need to upgrade the transmission and distribution power grid as part of an effective long-term national energy policy; and |
| • | environmental threats from global industrialization and population growth continue to influence nations to encourage environmentally friendly power technologies. |
We conduct our operations through three business units:
| • | AMSC Wires, a developer and manufacturer of HTS wire; |
| • | SuperMachines, a designer and manufacturer of rotating machines based on our HTS wire, including electric motors, generators and synchronous condensers; and |
| • | Power Electronic Systems, a designer and manufacturer of power electronic converters and integrated power electronic systems that increase power grid reliability and throughput and ensure high quality power for industrial manufacturing operations. |
29
Superconductor Technology
A superconductor is a perfect conductor of electricity. It carries DC with 100 percent efficiency because no energy is dissipated by resistive heating. DC in a superconducting loop can flow undiminished forever. Superconductors can also conduct alternating current (AC) but with some slight loss of energy.
Superconductor materials lose all resistance to the flow of DC and nearly all resistance to the flow of AC when they are cooled below a critical temperature. The critical temperature is different for each superconductor material. Superconductor materials, including both HTS materials and low temperature superconductor (LTS) materials, need to be cooled to very low temperatures to act as superconductors. Wires made with HTS material typically operate at temperatures that are five to 20 times higher than the operating temperatures of LTS materials. The process of cooling LTS materials to their critical temperature is expensive and often difficult, which limits the commercial applications of LTS technology. Conversely, the lower cost of cooling HTS materials broadens the range of potential commercial superconductor applications.
A combination of three conditions must be met for a material to exhibit superconductor behavior:
| • | The material must be cooled below its critical temperature (Tc); |
| • | The current passing through a cross-section of the material must be below a level known as the critical current density (Jc); and |
| • | The magnetic field to which the material is exposed must be below a value known as the critical magnetic field (Hc). |
Superconductor materials were initially discovered in 1911. Before 1986, no known superconductor had a critical temperature above 23 Kelvin. Zero Kelvin is the absolute zero of temperature and is the equivalent of minus 459 degrees Fahrenheit; 23 Kelvin is the equivalent of minus 418 degrees Fahrenheit.
In 1986, a breakthrough in superconductivity occurred when two scientists, Dr. K. Alex Müller and Dr. J. Georg Bednorz, at an IBM laboratory in Zurich, Switzerland, identified a ceramic oxide compound, an HTS material, which was shown to be superconductive at 36 degrees Kelvin (minus 395 degrees Fahrenheit). This discovery earned them the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1987, which is one of four Nobel Prizes awarded to date for work on superconductivity. A series of related ceramic oxide compounds that have higher critical temperatures have been subsequently discovered. This family of ceramic superconductors has come to be known as HTS materials. Some of these materials are being actively used throughout the world and by us for practical wire applications. A variety of organic materials have also been discovered, in a class called “fullerenes,” with critical temperatures ranging between those for high temperature ceramic oxide superconductors and low temperature metallic superconductors. Because of the expense and complexity of synthesizing the fullerenes and also their limited performance in a magnetic field, these have generally not been actively considered for wire applications.
In early 2001, it was discovered that a well-known and widely available material, magnesium diboride (MgB2), has a superconductor transition temperature at 40 Kelvin (minus 387 degrees Fahrenheit). The properties of MgB2 are consistent with those of LTS materials. Because of its potential low cost and ease of synthesis, work has been initiated around the world to investigate the use of MgB2 in wire applications. We initiated a program to investigate the commercial viability of MgB2 and concluded that it would be very difficult for MgB2 wire to compete against wires based on HTS or LTS materials. We have stopped development activities on MgB2 but continue to monitor new developments and are poised to reestablish our program if the need arises.
Power Electronics Technology
Advances in power electronics technology are enabling new, more reliable and efficient use of electric devices and are providing a critical component fundamental to new integrated power solutions that improve the reliability and quality of power delivered to users. Today, our growing digital-based economy demands better
30
power reliability and quality for higher performance through faster power conversion devices and active grid management. Power conversion and active grid management are enabled by power electronic devices, which convert generated or transmitted electric power to the appropriate form for a particular electrical application. Common examples of power electronic conversion include: AC-DC converters used at the interface between AC power sources and a number of applications that use only DC power; DC-DC converters used to change the DC voltage of a source; and DC-AC converters, usually called inverters, used to convert DC power to AC power. DC is typically produced by batteries and fuel cells, while AC is typically produced by electric generators and used in homes and businesses.
Power electronic converters incorporate power semiconductor devices that switch, control and move large amounts of power faster and with far less disruption than the electromechanical switches that have historically been used. These power converters can be used in a variety of applications from motor drives, power supplies, voltage regulators, and wind turbines to fuel cells, microturbines and photovoltaics.
Ongoing advances in power electronics technology have spawned new, more reliable and efficient power semiconductor switching devices. We employ devices such as insulated gate bipolar transistors (IGBT) operating in the 300 to 6,000 volt range and at switching frequencies up to 24,000 hertz. We incorporate these into our proprietary, state-of-the-art power electronic converters, which together enable lower cost and more effective, integrated solutions for power reliability and quality. Rather than using discrete packaging, we integrate the IGBTs onto printed circuit boards made of isolative and conductive materials, which increases reliability and reduces manufacturing cost. These circuit boards form a critical building block in our more powerful and smaller power electronic converters. Other key attributes of our power converters are their inherent programmability, flexibility and scalability. Embedded controllers allow end users to customize power converters to meet precise application requirements and optimize the performance characteristics of the device.
Market Overview
Power Demand and Transmission Capacity
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has estimated that electricity as a percentage of total energy use in the U.S. was 25 percent in 1970, has recently reached 40 percent, and will increase to 50 percent by 2020. This large projected increase is being driven in part by growth in the use of computers, the Internet, telecommunications, and other consumer-based electronic products. Projected growth rates for electric power consumption by these newer technologies are far higher than for traditional uses of power, which have historically grown in proportion to the gross domestic product of the U.S. We believe this growth in power consumption, and the corresponding demand for more reliable and higher quality power to support digital applications, will create demand for many of our products.
We believe another key factor affecting the market for our products and technologies is the expected need to upgrade the U.S. transmission infrastructure. In May 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a National Transmission Grid Study (NTGS), which highlights the important role the power grid plays in our economy, specifically outlines the major bottlenecks in the nation’s transmission system and makes recommendations for eliminating them. The report makes clear that if investment in the power grid does not begin now, the power grid will become considerably more congested, resulting in lower reliability and higher prices for electricity. We believe that the recommendations outlined in the NTGS report will be favorable to our efforts to commercialize our products and technologies. The report specifically calls for adopting new technologies including superconductors and power electronics to help alleviate transmission grid congestion.
In March 2003, the DOE, in collaboration with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) established the National Transmission Technology Research Center (NTTRC) in Oak Ridge, TN to provide a testing ground for new technologies and products that are designed to meet the needs identified in the NTGS, including those based on HTS materials and power electronics. The DOE, also in March
31
2003, established a new Office of Electric Transmission and Distribution (OETD), which is tasked with carrying out the recommendations of the NTGS. In April 2003, this office sponsored a National Electric System Vision Meeting in which approximately 60 industry, government and university leaders, including our representatives, gathered to further define the vision for the electric system in the U.S.
In July 2003, based on the input of the vision meeting, the OETD issued a report entitled Grid 2030—A National Vision for Electricity’s Second 100 Years that reflects the DOE’s expectation that HTS and power electronics technologies will play a significant role in upgrading the North American power grid. Also in July 2003, the OETD convened approximately 200 experts to start to create a technology roadmap to achieve the vision delineated in the Grid 2030 report.
All of these recent actions by the U.S. government indicate the serious nature of the problems affecting the U.S. power grid, the need for significant new investment in the power grid, and the need for HTS technology and advanced power electronics as part of the solution. We believe that we are well positioned to participate in the anticipated increase in investment in the U.S. power grid.
The chart below illustrates the decline in investment in the U.S. power grid over the last several decades. This trend is the result of uncertainties with respect to the ownership and the return on investment in power grid assets caused by uncertainties in potential changes in power grid regulations and policies. We believe this decrease in investment in the power grid in the U.S., coupled with the increasing demand for more electric power, has contributed to pent-up demand for power grid solutions.
| Source: | Transmission Planning for Restructuring the U.S. Electricity Industry, Edison Electric Institute, June 2001. |
We expect that pent-up demand for power grid solutions will be favorable to sales of our current and planned products. In addition, we expect demand for our products and technologies to increase with changes now taking place in certain regulations and policies related to power grid operation and expansion of the power grid. We believe that the latter changes could stimulate investment in the grid just as deregulation of the telecommunications industry created rapid investment in optical fibers in the 1980s and in power generation equipment in the late 1990s.
32
On August 14, 2003, the largest power outage, or blackout, in U.S. history occurred. It affected approximately 50 million people across the northeastern U.S. and Canada and is estimated to have cost billions of dollars in lost productivity and commerce. While the root cause of the blackout is not yet known, industry experts had predicted that such blackouts would occur as a result of the increasing demand for electricity and the decreasing rate of investment in the power grid over the last 30 years. We believe that this blackout has created an intense public focus on solving power grid problems. We also believe that we are well positioned to address this business growth opportunity.
Power Reliability and Power Quality
The reliability of the power transmission network and the quality of power delivered to customers are becoming increasingly important in today’s economy.
Power grid congestion caused by growing electrical demands on capacity-constrained power lines and cables, in addition to voltage instability and low voltage in the power grid, are causing significant reliability problems for the nation’s growing digital-based economy.
Downtime due to power-related problems is becoming an increasing concern to many industries as the equipment used to manufacture products utilizes more and more power-sensitive digital components. Protection against power quality problems, such as voltage sags lasting two seconds or less, can provide significant economic value to large industrial users of power. Such momentary sags cause more than 90 percent of all plant shutdowns, which can last from hours to days and be very costly. In 1998, Sandia National Laboratories estimated that the annual cost to U.S. businesses of power disturbances is $150 billion with $114 billion or 76 percent resulting from voltage sags and other voltage regulation problems. EPRI estimates that the cost of power disruptions to the U.S. economy is at least $120 billion per year, and growing by as much as 10 percent annually.
Power Reliability. “Power reliability” refers to the ability to deliver power where and when it is needed. Operators of transmission and distribution grids quantify reliability as the fraction of time the power grid is up and running, after subtracting time needed for planned maintenance. Power grid operators are increasingly confronting reliability issues arising from the capacity limitations of transmission and distribution lines (overhead) and cables (underground). Because lines and cables are made with either copper or aluminum wires, they heat up due to the electrical resistance of these metals. Pushing too much power through a line or cable will heat it up to its “thermal limit.” At that point, more power flow through the line or cable will cause it to fail. Thus, as demand for power increases in the digital age, it is necessary to upgrade existing transmission and distribution corridors with more or higher capacity lines or cables.
Today, most transmission and distribution lines and cables are run at only 40 to 60 percent of their thermal limits. This is because individual lines and cables reach their “voltage stability limit” well below their thermal limit. Driving more power through a power grid when some of its lines and cables are operating above their voltage stability limit at peak demand times causes either low voltage in the power grid (a “brownout”) or risk of sudden, uncontrollable voltage collapse (a “blackout”). The solution to power reliability problems lies in mitigating dynamic voltage stability problems and in augmenting transmission and distribution grid capacity.
The traditional way to increase power grid capacity and voltage stability is to install more overhead power lines. This allows for redundancy of power flow pathways and allows power grid operators to safely run systems closer to the thermal limits of the weakest links in the power grid. However, as a result of declining investment in the power grids in the U.S. during the last several decades, as well as rising public resistance to new overhead lines due to environmental, aesthetic and health concerns (which can result in permitting processes of five to 10 years or more), few new power lines are being built.
At the local distribution level, the theoretical solution to increasing electricity delivery capacity is to increase the number of copper or aluminum distribution lines and underground cables. However, this approach is
33
not generally practical in large metropolitan areas for two important reasons: (i) many existing underground conduits carrying power distribution cables are already filled to their physical capacity and cannot accommodate any additional cables; and (ii) adding new conduits requires securing new or expanded rights of way and digging up streets to lay new conduit pipe, tasks that are costly and impose significant disruptions.
We offer commercial solutions to these challenges today and are developing innovative solutions for the future. We sell integrated power electronic systems commercially and currently have 18 integrated power electronic systems at nine customer locations in the U.S. and Canada that provide voltage stabilization in transmission and distribution power grids. These transmission reliability systems enable power grids to operate closer to their thermal limits, which in many cases means the existing power grid can carry more power. Our HTS wire is expected to enable a new class of high capacity, environmentally benign and easy to install transmission and distribution cables that address power grid capacity issues by increasing the thermal limit of existing or new rights of way. We expect that our HTS wire will be utilized in a number of new HTS power cable demonstrations over the next two years. Our HTS dynamic synchronous condensers—AC rotating machines that generate or absorb real or reactive power to support and stabilize power grid voltage—are designed to increase power flow through existing transmission lines. In November 2003, we plan to install the first prototype in a transmission grid operated by TVA.
Power Quality. Distinct from the issue of power reliability is the problem of power quality. Power quality anomalies (most commonly voltage “sags,” which are momentary drops in the voltage in power grids) are an expected part of normal power grid operations, such as reclosure operations used to clear electrical faults in power grids.
The electrical faults may be caused by a variety of factors, including lightning strikes, animals or tree limbs in contact with power lines and even what the industry refers to as “car / pole interactions.” To a residential customer, a momentary power sag may be manifest as nothing more than a briefly flickering kitchen light. To a continuous process manufacturer, that same power quality problem may cause a costly interruption in microprocessor-controlled manufacturing lines. Because momentary sags are part of the normal operation of the power grid, they must be solved at the customer’s site, which we achieve with our power electronics-based industrial power quality solutions.
We believe we are well positioned to participate in the expected increases in investment in power grid reliability solutions and in industrial power quality solutions over the next decade and beyond. We anticipate that our participation in this growing opportunity will be through sales of our existing power electronics-based solutions and in the future, through sales of our HTS dynamic synchronous condensers and our HTS wires for high-capacity power cables. Future applications could also include fault current limiters and transformers.
Power Electronic Converters
Driven in part by the trend toward a global digital economy, the complexity of switching power into useful forms is increasing. This, in conjunction with increasingly economical and efficient power converters, is driving the market for power conversion applications. Industry experts estimate that more than 20 percent of all power generated in the U.S. passes through power electronic converters at power levels exceeding 60 kilowatts (kW) and that this amount will increase with the introduction of new applications, including distributed and dispersed generation of power.
Electrical devices are becoming more “intelligent” as microprocessors and embedded controllers add new functionality to power converters. Key trends in power electronic converters designed for use in power infrastructure applications include greater modularity and standardization, programmability, and the demand for smaller units with higher power density, which is the amount of power handled per unit volume of the converter device. We are focusing our power converter product development activities on power levels of 60 to 1,000 kW because we believe this is the market segment in which our power conversion technology offers the greatest value to customers.
34
Based on our market analyses, we believe that the addressable market for our power converter product line, at power levels greater than 60 kW, is approximately $1 billion per year. The addressable markets include motor drives, uninterruptible power supplies and other power quality systems, wind turbines, electric vehicles, power grid reliability solutions and distributed and dispersed generation devices, such as fuel cells and diesel generators.
Rotating Machines: Motors, Generators and Synchronous Condensers
We have developed large-scale, HTS rotating AC synchronous machines that have, to date, been demonstrated as motors. This same AC synchronous rotating machine platform can be used as a generator or as a dynamic synchronous condenser. We plan to develop and commercialize HTS motors, generators and synchronous condensers.
The market for large electric motors and generators is well developed, with strong competitors and intense price pressure. We estimate that the annual worldwide market for industrial motors, which we define as machines with ratings of 1,000 horsepower (hp) or higher, is approximately $1 billion, and is expanding at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 2 to 4 percent. We estimate that the annual worldwide market for utility-scale electrical generators, which we define as generators with power ratings over 100 mega-volt-amperes (MVA), is approximately $1.6 billion per year, and the market for industrial generators (typically 20 to 100 MVA) is approximately $0.4 billion. We estimate that the worldwide market for utility and industrial generators is growing at a CAGR of approximately 2 to 4 percent.
During the last 10 years, the commercial cruise ship industry has made a transition to electric propulsion systems in which electric motors are used to directly drive the ship’s propeller. An electric generator powered by a gas turbine, or other prime mover, provides the electricity to run the motor. The first ship type to convert to an electric propulsion system was the cruise ship, with the conversion from steam to electric propulsion of the Queen Elizabeth 2 in 1987. Today, virtually all commercial cruise ships are being built with electric propulsion systems. Similarly, many other types of commercial vessel, including product tankers, Ro-Ro (Roll-on Roll-off) and Ro-Pax (Roll-on Roll-off Passenger), liquefied natural gas carriers, cable layers, research ships and supply craft have been redesigned to incorporate the benefits electric propulsion systems provide over the older mechanical propulsion. The benefits HTS motors and generators provide to the marine propulsion market include smaller size, lighter weight, greater efficiency, and lower noise. These benefits translate into reduced fuel costs, better reaction time and increased cargo and passenger cabin space.
Naval ships around the world are converting to electric propulsion as well. In January 2000, the U.S. Navy declared it would transition to electric propulsion systems and in 2002 awarded a contract for the design of an advanced, electrically-propelled new generation of destroyer, the DD(X).
35
We estimate that the current market for electric motors and generators for ship propulsion systems is approximately $450 million. Industry experts forecast that this market will grow at a CAGR of up to 20 percent over the next 10 years due to the accelerating transition to electric drives, which is already well underway today. The following chart shows anticipated growth rates in addressable markets for HTS rotating machines.
HTS rotating machines, when operated as dynamic synchronous condensers (DSC) in power grid substations, are capable of generating or absorbing reactive power, which is measured in VARs (volt-amp reactive). In addition to continuous VAR support, an HTS DSC or SuperVAR™ machine can help stabilize power grids by providing a fast, reliable, low-cost response to transient and disruptive events. This is accomplished through the HTS machine’s unique ability to provide an estimated six to eight times its rated capacity (overload) in response to transient events. SuperVAR™ machines also produce VARs on a continuous basis to 100 percent of their full rating (both leading and lagging) to increase grid transmission capacity.
Based on our own market analyses and those of TVA, the largest public utility in the U.S., we expect the need for VARs in support of both steady-state and transient power grid operation to continue to rise as the demand for power increases. It is currently estimated that approximately 10,000 mega-VAR (MVAR) of additional support are needed today in the U.S. market, with an anticipated growth rate of 4 percent per year. The international market is expected to grow at more than double this rate. We believe HTS DSCs can supply a major fraction of this demand.
Large electric rotating machine production is labor intensive, requires a large fixed asset investment, and does not lend itself to mass production techniques. As a result, many manufacturers of large motors and generators are seeking opportunities to reduce manufacturing and investment costs to improve profitability. We believe size and weight reductions in large electric motors, generators, and SuperVARs resulting from the use of HTS technology will enable significant reductions in manufacturing costs. During the last two years, we have shifted our focus in the development of electric rotating machines to ship propulsion and DSC applications. We believe we are well positioned to be a leader in these rapidly growing markets.
36
Our Businesses
We are organized into three business units: AMSC Wires, SuperMachines and Power Electronic Systems.
Each business unit is run separately by a vice president and general manager, who reports to our Chief Executive Officer. Although these business units are run independently, we leverage common customer and technology opportunities across all of the business units. Each of our business units is engaged in the manufacture and sale of commercial or prototype products and in the development of technology and new products. Our Power Electronic Systems business unit has been selling commercial products since 1999. Our AMSC Wires business unit is selling commercial HTS wires that it produces at a full-scale commercial manufacturing plant we opened in December 2002. Our SuperMachines business unit is developing, assembling, and testing prototype motors and synchronous condensers.
A customer set common to all of these business units is power grid operators, and thus, much of our sales and marketing efforts are directed to this customer category. A significant part of our sales and marketing efforts is focused on the U.S., however, we are currently marketing our products and technologies around the world. Our channels to market include direct sales, agents and manufacturers’ representatives.
To facilitate our traditional sales and marketing efforts, we have created the Advanced Grid Solutions business development team, comprised of seasoned veterans who have worked in all aspects of power generation, transmission, government regulation and policies, cryogenic systems and cable technology. Also participating in the business development team are four transmission planners with well over 70 years of transmission planning experience and a broad depth of knowledge of the design and structure of transmission and distribution grids. These transmission planning experts use sophisticated software programs to perform power flow and stability analyses on power grids to help determine the best solutions to increase reliability and capacity. The Advanced Grid Solutions business development team is currently working with electric utilities and industrial users of power to create solutions that utilize our current or planned products.
AMSC Wires Business
The AMSC Wires business unit is responsible for the design, development and manufacture of HTS wires. It sells wire to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) that incorporate HTS wire into value-added products.
Our commercial wire product is a multi-filamentary composite HTS wire, typically called “first generation” or “1G” wire, which can carry more than 140 times the power of copper wires of the same dimensions. Currently, the AMSC Wires business unit is selling 1G HTS wire primarily to OEM manufacturers that incorporate the wire into prototype power cables, motors, generators and magnet applications for sale to the utility, transportation, ship building and industrial processing markets. Our SuperMachines business unit is an AMSC Wires customer. We also sell wire to customers that are in early stages of research and development. These customers use the wire in products such as power transformers, fault current limiters and electromagnet applications in the medical industry and other fields.
AMSC Wire Production Techniques. We produce our commercial 1G HTS wire with deformation processing, which is analogous to the techniques used in the existing metal wire industry. In this approach, a silver alloy tube is packed with an oxide precursor powder and sealed. The tube is then deformed into a wire shape by a variety of deformation processing techniques such as wire-drawing and rolling. Finally, the wire is heat-treated to transform the precursor powder inside the wire into a high temperature superconductor. The resulting composite structure consists of many fine superconductor filaments embedded in a silver matrix. The filaments of HTS material, which are typically one-sixth the thickness of a human hair, extend through the entire length of the wire. The composite structure is the subject of a patent owned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), based on an invention by Dr. Gregory Yurek, our Chairman of the Board, President, Chief Executive Officer, co-founder, and a former professor at MIT, and co-founder Dr. John Vander Sande, a professor at MIT, and a member of the Board of Directors. This patent is licensed to us on an exclusive basis until its expiration date in 2010.
37
We have received additional patents based on the 1G HTS wire structure and processes related thereto. As of June 30, 2003, we have approximately 153 patents and patents pending worldwide related to 1G HTS wire technology. As of June 30, 2003, we also have licenses to approximately 247 worldwide patents and patents pending owned by others for 1G HTS wire technology. We believe we have a very strong intellectual property position in the area of 1G HTS wire.
Over the past year we have made significant progress in expanding our 1G HTS wire manufacturing capacity to meet growing customer demand for HTS wire. In December 2002, we produced our first saleable wire in a new 355,000-square-foot HTS wire manufacturing facility located in Devens, MA. Operations and engineering for the AMSC Wires business unit has relocated to this facility and production for customer orders is now completed there as well. Current production capacity is 900 km/year. The facility has been designed to expand the production capacity on a “just-in-time” basis as product demand increases. Costs for the first expansion to 1,500 km/year will be about $350,000, which will be implemented in line with customer demand.
We believe that the Devens, MA manufacturing facility will provide us with a competitive advantage as the market for HTS wire continues to grow over the next several years. The facility, at full capacity, is capable of producing 20,000 kilometers (approximately 12,000 miles) of 1G HTS wire annually. We estimate that the additional cost to expand from our current capacity to 20,000 kilometers per year will be approximately $30 million. However, we do not anticipate expanding to full capacity for 1G HTS wire because we now believe we will transition our HTS wire manufacturing operation in our Devens, MA manufacturing facility over the next three to four years to an inherently lower cost wire manufacturing methodology, as discussed later in this section.
We have been successful in developing and producing HTS wire with performance levels sufficient to meet the technical needs for applications such as power cables, utility generators, shipboard motors and several electromagnet applications. While we believe our HTS wire will meet the commercial needs for these applications, there can be no assurance that we will achieve this goal or, if we do achieve it, that the market will adopt these new products.
In the past few years, we have made significant progress in improving the price-performance ratio of our HTS wire. We believe that our wire is the standard for the industry based on both the price and the performance of our HTS wire. The price-performance ratio is obtained by dividing the price-per-meter ($/m) we charge customers by the amount of kilo Amperes (kA) this wire can carry.
The key factor in driving down the price-performance ratio of our 1G HTS wire in the next few years is our ability to leverage our HTS wire manufacturing plant and lower product costs through the economics of volume manufacturing, design improvements, factory automation and enhanced productivity. We have anticipated that manufacturing process improvements, developed in our 1G HTS wire pilot operations and incorporated in our commercial plant, would also create improvements in the electrical performance of our HTS wire. In fact, wire produced in our new operation has higher performance characteristics than wire produced in our pilot operation. Its average performance (measured in Amperes) is also more than 50 percent higher than that of the wire manufactured by our closest competitors.
Continuous improvements in the electrical performance of our 1G HTS wires is an important factor in reducing the price-performance ratio of our HTS wire and in meeting customer specifications for high electrical performance. However, we must also continue to improve procedures in each of our 1G HTS wire manufacturing steps in order to increase our manufacturing yield. We estimate that manufacturing yield for 1G HTS wire from our new plant during its first year of operation will be in the range of 40 to 60 percent. We expect to achieve yields at this level during fiscal 2004 and to continue increasing yield as we refine our standard operating procedures and optimize performance of the new equipment and machinery.
The current selling price of 1G HTS wire varies according to customer specifications. For many customers, the price is typically $20 per meter. The corresponding price-performance ratio is $160/kAm using 125 Amperes (0.125 kA) as the typical performance of our commercial wire today. This represents a 20 percent improvement in our price-performance ratio over the past year.
38
We believe we can drive down the price-performance ratio of our 1G HTS wire to $50/kAm through further manufacturing cost reductions and additional improvements in electrical performance. A price-performance ratio of $50/kAm is more than sufficient to meet the commercial and technical requirements of ship propulsion motors and generators, utility generators, power cables in metropolitan-area applications and other superconductor electromagnet applications.
Our strategy for future wire cost reductions has changed over the last year due to significant success in the development of our coated conductor composite HTS wire, also called “second generation” or “2G” wire. Our 2G HTS wire has a different architecture from that of our 1G HTS wire, as shown in the figure below. Our 2G HTS wire promises to duplicate or exceed the performance characteristics of our existing wire at a two to five times lower price-performance ratio. Importantly, this 2G HTS wire will be a form, fit, and function replacement for our 1G HTS wire, assuring that current and potential AMSC Wires customers can benefit from continued cost reductions without the need to re-tool their production equipment from 1G HTS wire designs. We believe that we will ultimately provide our 2G HTS wire at a price-performance ratio superior to that of copper wire, which typically has a price-performance ratio of $15/kAm to $25/kAm. However, because of the time required to scale-up and establish 2G HTS wire manufacturing, we expect that our primary HTS wire product over the next three to four years will remain 1G multi-filamentary composite HTS wire. Our plan is to raise additional capital in order to build a pilot plant for 2G HTS wire in our Devens, MA manufacturing facility, as originally planned. This will take about two years to accomplish after completing further technology verifications. After successful implementation of the pilot plant, we expect to expand the pilot operation into a full manufacturing operation at a rate of expansion dictated by customer demand. We estimate that the 2G HTS wire manufacturing capacity at the Devens, MA manufacturing facility at about 65,000 km per year, based on our current 2G HTS wire manufacturing methodology, and assuming the entire facility is converted to 2G HTS wire manufacturing.
We have invested seven years and more than $48 million in the development of a 2G HTS wire manufacturing methodology that we believe will allow us to achieve a price-performance ratio equal to or lower than that of copper. We believe we have accomplished the initial portion of our 2G HTS wire development goals. Although some of the technical goals we have achieved have also been met by other companies, we believe that our manufacturing process has significant economic advantages.
39
In July 2003, we announced that our 2G HTS wire exceeded performance expectations by over 50% in tests conducted by ORNL on a cable conductor made with 2G HTS wire. The cable conductor, the central conductive element in power cables, was fabricated by Ultera, a joint venture between Southwire Company and nkt cables, in collaboration with ORNL. The ORNL tests results confirmed the 1.25 meter long device as the world’s first 2G HTS cable conductor to achieve a commercial performance level (i.e., an AC level greater than 2,000 Amperes).
Key Markets for HTS Wires (Power Cables). We believe that an important application for our HTS wire is high-capacity power cables. Because of the high power capacity of HTS wire, HTS power cables have the potential to carry up to 10 times more power, depending on the design and operating characteristics of the cable, than copper-wire cables of the same dimensions. The performance levels and mechanical properties of our HTS wire are sufficient today to meet the technical requirements for cables that can alleviate congestion in power transmission systems.
There are several designs for HTS power cables that are being developed and tested by a number of cable manufacturers around the world. In all cases, the cryogenic coolant for the HTS wires in these cables is liquid nitrogen. Nitrogen, which comprises approximately 79 percent of the air we breathe, is an environmentally friendly, nonflammable material. When cooled by standard industrial refrigeration techniques, nitrogen gas turns into a relatively inexpensive liquid, which is used in many applications, from steel making to crushing of spices to cryogenic freezing of biological materials on farms.
HTS power cables must be thermally insulated from their surroundings to minimize the refrigeration expense associated with keeping the nitrogen in its liquid state, which, in turn, keeps the temperature of the HTS wire in the cable below its critical temperature. The cryogenic insulation, typically called a cryostat, is made in a variety of forms depending on the cable architecture. Cryostats of the type needed for HTS power cables have been manufactured for decades by companies such as Nexans and Vacuum Barrier Corporation. The kind of cryogenic refrigeration equipment needed for HTS power cables is typically made by companies such as Air Liquide, Air Products and Chemicals, Praxair and others. Further developments to improve the costs of both cryogenic refrigeration and cryostats are necessary to catalyze broad market adoption of HTS cables.
HTS cables can provide a variety of advantages over conventional copper cables. Most important are the power density and very low impedance (VLI) characteristics of several cable designs. These product features provide end user benefits in the following areas:
Infrastructure Siting and Permitting. Due largely to environmental and property value concerns, acquiring permits for overhead transmission lines has become a very difficult process that can take over a decade with no guarantee of success. Conventional underground copper transmission cables can be applied in some applications, but technical considerations limit widespread use. Co-axial HTS underground cables alleviate these concerns. With such HTS cables, fewer cables are needed to transmit the same amount of power, they have very low impedance, soil heating concerns are eliminated, and no stray electromagnetic fields (EMF) are produced.
Relieving Network Congestion. Co-axial HTS cables have VLI characteristics. Since electricity flows along the path of least impedance, these HTS cables can be used to change the flow dynamics of a transmission network. When properly placed, HTS cables can be used to draw power flow away from overtaxed conventional cables or overhead lines and expand the overall system capacity with minimal new infrastructure or disruption. As part of our marketing effort, we have developed a business development group called Advanced Grid Solutions, which has the transmission planning expertise to model individual utility systems and work with utility planning groups to determine how HTS cables can add value in their networks.
Controlling Power Flow. VLI HTS cables have another significant benefit. Because they have very low impedance, AC power flow through them can be controlled with conventional series reactors or phase shifters. This is becoming more important as the electrical industry becomes more deregulated and as interest in merchant cable
40
systems become more widespread. Historically, power flow has been controlled by converting AC power to DC power. This requires the use of inverters and rectifiers that are much more expensive than series reactors and phase shifters. Even if DC power is chosen, HTS cables may be the best choice. DC HTS circuits double the ampacity of similar sized AC HTS circuits and can provide up to 10 times the amperage of similar-sized conventional DC cables. In larger DC power applications the economics of HTS cables are superior to conventional DC circuits.
Reduced Construction Costs. For many years, urban retrofit projects have been recognized as an ideal application for HTS cables. In many urban areas the demand for power has outgrown the existing infrastructure. To solve this problem with conventional technology incurs the major disruption and large expense associated with digging up streets to install new conduit systems. Because HTS cables transmit significantly more power than conventional cables, in many cases it is possible to replace existing cables in existing conduits with HTS cables, and more than triple the available power without trenching or other disruptive construction activities. Even when some trenching is needed with HTS cables, the disruption and expense is much less since fewer cables are needed and multiple cables can be put in one trench without causing thermal concerns.
Voltage Reduction. The high amperage characteristics of HTS cables allow significant reductions in voltage without a reduction in total power transferred. This can result in significant savings in support infrastructure such as substations, terminations, splices, etc. In addition, the ability to transmit large amounts of power at lower voltages can often eliminate the need for locating substations in sensitive or expensive sites.
Lower Power Losses. HTS wire transmits DC power with zero resistive losses. This feature makes DC HTS circuits nearly perfect conductors. On a net loss basis (including energy consumed for refrigeration) DC HTS circuits and most AC HTS circuits consume less energy than conventional circuits.
In order for electric utilities and power grid operators to adopt HTS cables, they must first see the successful testing and operation of HTS cables in high voltage test facilities and in actual power grid installations. The first phase of HTS cable demonstrations began in 1996 and ended in the first half of 2003. The demonstration projects involved in the first phase were highly successful; only the Detroit Edison HTS cable project, which was run by Pirelli Energia e Sistemi (Pirelli), fell short of its goal when leaks developed in the cable’s thermal insulation system (the cable cryostat). The list of projects in the first phase includes:
| • | Pirelli: 50m, 115kV, 2000 A, Pirelli test facility (1996-1999); |
| • | Pirelli: 120m, 24 kV, 2400 A, Detroit substation (2001-2002); |
| • | Sumitomo: 30m, 66 kV, 1000 A, TEPCO test facility (1996-1999); |
| • | Sumitomo: 100m, 66 kV, 1000 A, TEPCO test facility (2001-2002); |
| • | Southwire: 30m, 12.5 kV, 2600 A, Southwire manufacturing plant (2000-2003); |
| • | NKT Cables: 30m, 30 kV, 2000A, Copenhagen substation (2001-2003); and |
| • | Condumex: 5m, 2000 A, Condumex test facility (2001-2002). |
Eight to 10 new HTS cable demonstrations are expected to be underway between now and 2005. These demonstrations will occur in the U.S., Europe, China, Korea, Japan and Mexico. In April 2003, we were selected by the DOE as prime contractor to install a 600 MW, 138 kilo-Volt (kV) HTS cable system in the power grid of LIPA. We selected Nexans as our subcontractor to manufacture the HTS cable, the cable cryostat and the cable terminations, and we selected Air Liquide to provide the cryogenic system design and the refrigeration equipment. The DOE will provide project financing and technical review. AMSC Wires will supply about 128 km of HTS wire to Nexans for this project. The cable system is being designed to become a permanent part of the LIPA power grid. This project is viewed by LIPA as the first phase of an HTS circuit that will provide power to much of Long Island. We view this project as a final precursor to commercial HTS cable sales. We are currently discussing commercial power cable applications with several potential end users in the U.S. and abroad. There can be, however, no assurance that operators of transmission and distribution grids will adopt HTS power cables after the demonstration phase is complete. To the extent that HTS cables are adopted for commercial applications, we believe our HTS wire will be competitive and that we will have a significant market for our HTS wires in power cable applications.
41
Key Markets for HTS Wire (Utility Generators). We believe another significant market for our HTS wire will be utility generators that produce 100 MVA or more of power. Benefits of using HTS wires in these generators include improved VAR control, longevity (HTS generator coils run “cold,” so there are no thermal stresses), smaller size, weight and footprint, improved energy efficiency, and potentially lower costs. General Electric Power Systems (GEPS), a business of the General Electric Company, is currently developing a 100 MVA HTS electrical generator using our wire. We have been selected by GEPS as their primary wire supplier for utility generators. Over the last three years, we have supplied HTS wire to GEPS for test purposes.
The first HTS rotor for a 100 MVA generator is being developed by GEPS and is expected to undergo testing in 2004. We believe commercial HTS utility generators could be operational by 2005. According to estimates by GEPS, the performance and projected costs of our 1G HTS wire are sufficient to meet the technical and economic objectives of commercial HTS generators.
The four primary manufacturers of utility generators are GEPS, Alstom Power Conversion, Siemens-Westinghouse and Mitsubishi Electric Corporation. We are currently marketing our HTS wire to all of these generator manufacturers with the goal of becoming the primary wire supplier to each of them; however, we can make no assurances that these generator manufacturers will develop commercial HTS generators and, to the extent they are successful, that they will choose our HTS wire.
Key Markets for HTS Wire (Rotating Machines). Our SuperMachines business unit produces rotating HTS machines and is a customer for wire produced by the AMSC Wires business unit. AMSC Wires also sells its HTS wire to other manufacturers of rotating machines. SuperMachines is focused on electric motors and generators for marine propulsion and on synchronous condensers for power grid reliability. A review of the SuperMachines business unit’s products and markets is provided later.
We believe the market for HTS wire for electric motors and generators will be large and we believe we are in a position to capture a significant share of this market; however, we cannot provide assurance that a market for HTS electric motors, generators and synchronous condensers will develop or, to the extent that it does, that our HTS wire will be purchased by the manufacturers of these machines.
Other HTS Wire Applications. Over the last several years we have sold our HTS wires to a number of OEMs and research and development organizations that are developing other applications for HTS wire. In March 2003 we received an order from Dupont for an HTS electromagnet for a commercial-scale industrial magnetic separator, which will use about 40 km of our HTS wire. This is a follow-on order to the electromagnet we delivered two years ago to Dupont for a prototype magnetic separator. That prototype exceeded Dupont’s design goals in testing. Dupont expects to produce commercial magnetic separators after the successful operation of the electromagnet we are currently producing.
We have also sold HTS wire for transportation, military, medical and other applications. Some of these applications have significant near-term sales potential, while other applications, such as transformers and fault current limiters, are in the early development stage.
Some of these other applications have the potential to become important markets for our HTS wire, and we will continue to market our HTS wire to the developers of these and other new products. We cannot make any assurances, however, that these markets will develop, that they will become significant markets or that our HTS wire will be purchased for use in these markets.
Sales and Marketing for HTS Wire. We plan to sell wire to a broad OEM market, and we are aiming for a high market share, which we plan to protect by being the market leader in performance, cost, service and intellectual property. We are focusing our business and market development efforts on key OEMs that we believe are the market leaders. By establishing strong relationships with these market leaders we can foster more rapid market development and have a significant impact on industry standards. Most of our key OEMs are serviced by our direct sales force. However, in some areas we have found it advantageous to form sales alliances to establish ourselves in the market. For example, in the fall of 2001, we signed a multi-year distribution agreement with Kiswire Ltd., a leading Korean wire manufacturer, to distribute HTS wire in the Korean market.
42
As a result of our collaboration with Kiswire, we were chosen to be the supplier of 1G HTS wire for the Korean national superconductor program, which has led to sales and follow-on orders for our HTS wire. We have also made significant inroads into China, which has the world’s second largest electric power generation capacity. In July 2003, we announced that we will ship 18 miles (approximately 30 kilometers) of our HTS wire to China for use in two electric power projects.
Our Advanced Grid Solutions (AGS) business development team, described earlier, is helping us build demand for HTS wire and further penetrate key markets. We are leveraging this team’s experience in transmission planning by working with utilities to identify locations in their system where HTS solutions would add value to their power grids. We are also applying the team’s project management experience to facilitate project concept development, close orders and implement projects.
Competition for HTS Wires. We face intense competition both from vendors of traditional wires, such as copper, and from competitors who are developing HTS wires. There are several companies around the world that are our competitors in the market for 1G HTS wire. They presently include Sumitomo Electric Industries (Japan), Furukawa Electric (Japan), European Advanced Superconductor, formerly part of Vacuumschmelze GmbH, and as of July 2003, a division of Bruker Biospin (Germany), Innova Superconductor Technology Co. Ltd. (China) and Trithor GmbH (a German start-up company).
In October 2002, we purchased the assets of a 1G HTS wire competitor, Nordic Superconductor Technologies A/S (NST), a subsidiary of Denmark’s NKT Holding A/S (NKT), and a direct competitor in 1G HTS wire. The purchase was implemented as a stock transaction with NKT receiving 546,000 shares of our common stock. In return, we received all of the equipment, material, patents and engineering information from NST. NST was shut down and some of the material and equipment has been sold, which resulted in this transaction being essentially cash neutral for us. Other NST equipment has been incorporated into our manufacturing process or will be as we need to increase manufacturing capacity. In addition, the engineering knowledge and customer contacts we received from NST have been valuable in improving our HTS wire products, our manufacturing processes and our further penetration of the market for HTS wires.
We also face competition in 2G coated conductor composite HTS wires from a number of companies in the U.S. and abroad. These include Intermagnetics General Corporation and MetOx (U.S.), Sumitomo, Fujikura and Furukawa (Japan), and Theva, Bekaert and a potential spinout from the University of Germany in Germany. Impressive laboratory results have been achieved by some of our 2G HTS wire competitors. However, we believe that the processes we have adopted will prove to be the best processes to provide not only high performance wire, but also commercial quantities at the lowest cost.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources, research and development, manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do. In addition, as HTS wire markets develop, other large industrial companies may enter these fields and compete with us.
SuperMachines Business
Our SuperMachines business unit is responsible for the design, development, manufacturing, testing and commercialization of HTS electric motors with power ratings up to approximately 50,000 hp (37.5 MW) and generators with power ratings generally in the range of 20 to 100 MVA. This unit buys HTS wire from the AMSC Wires business unit and winds the wire into electromagnetic coils of various sizes and shapes, which are incorporated into the rotors of motors, generators and dynamic synchronous condensers, all of which are AC synchronous rotating machines. In such rotating machines, the rotor coils utilize DC, to which our HTS wire exhibits zero electrical resistance, a feature that typically cuts the electrical losses of AC synchronous rotating machines in half compared with copper wire-based machines.
The use of HTS wire in rotating machines provides us with significant competitive advantages by enabling dramatic reductions in size, weight and manufacturing costs relative to conventional machines. Because of the significant manufacturing cost reductions associated with the reduced size of our HTS rotating machines, we
43
expect the market price of our rotating machines to be equivalent to that of copper-based machines at the same power and torque rating. The advantages of HTS rotating machines in ship propulsion applications are summarized in the following figure:
The HTS rotor coils in our superconductor rotating machines are cooled using commercially available mechanical refrigerators located near the machine, which cool the rotor using our patented techniques. We are also developing new refrigeration system technology that we believe could further reduce the cost of cryogenic cooling.
The cooling systems used for HTS motors and generators are closed loop, meaning that the cooling medium, typically a gas, circulates inside a closed system from the region of the HTS coils on the rotor, where the cooling medium picks up heat, to the cold head of the refrigerator, where the cooling medium releases heat and is chilled again. The cooling media we typically use for our rotating machines are either liquid neon or gaseous helium. In the case of our neon systems, the liquid neon absorbs heat by turning into a gas, which is condensed back to liquid at the cold head outside the rotating machine—much like an R12 cycle in home refrigerators. In the case of gaseous helium, no liquid phase is involved.
Our AC synchronous motors and generators have a higher net efficiency, including the losses associated with the cooling system, than conventional machines of the same power rating. This efficiency gain is particularly noteworthy when an HTS rotating machine is operated at part load, such as in marine propulsion applications when a ship is moving at slow speeds. The stator coils in our AC synchronous machines utilize copper windings, which are cooled either with air, oil or water, in a manner similar to that used for conventional motors and generators.
Our SuperMachines business unit is experienced in HTS rotating machine design, development and testing, and has built a significant portfolio of intellectual property, much of which is protected by more than 40 U.S. and 60 international patents and patents pending. We believe that we are well positioned to transform a 100-year-old
44
rotating machine industry with our innovative HTS technology. Our history of involvement in the development of HTS rotating machines is shown in the following figure:
During the past year, we had the opportunity to incorporate our HTS rotating machine technology into a new application. The TVA proposed the use of our AC synchronous rotating machine technology platform as the basis for an HTS dynamic synchronous condenser that would enhance power grid stability by generating reactive power at critical locations in its power grid. In January 2003, TVA awarded SuperMachines a contract for the design, fabrication and delivery of a prototype and an order for the first five commercial units of an 8 to 10 MVAR HTS dynamic synchronous condenser, which we have named a SuperVAR™ machine. To demonstrate its operation, the prototype SuperVAR™ machine will be delivered in November 2003 and installed on the TVA power grid in Tennessee. Upon successful completion of prototype testing, SuperMachines will build five commercial units to be delivered to TVA beginning in 2005.
In February 2003, SuperMachines was awarded a contract by the U.S. Navy to design and manufacture a 36.5 MW, 120 rpm HTS marine propulsion motor for delivery in March 2006. This contract, worth approximately $70 million including certain performance incentive fees, is the largest contract in our history and represents a major milestone in the development of HTS rotating machines in general, and of military and commercial ship propulsion motors, in particular. This contract represents the fifth in a series of U.S. Navy awards to SuperMachines since 1999 for the conceptual and preliminary design of HTS ship propulsion motors and the development of key components for such motors.
In addition to these two important contract awards, SuperMachines completed the design and assembly of a 5 MW, 230-rpm HTS marine propulsion motor for the U.S. Navy on schedule in February 2003. During March, the motor completed a series of standard factory acceptance tests including testing to full torque, full speed and 50 percent load. In addition, noise and vibration signature testing were completed. The motor met all design requirements during these tests and performed well in comparison to predicted values. The motor was delivered on schedule to the U.S. Navy in July 2003.
45
Our efforts to commercialize HTS rotating machines continue with these new contracts and with the completion of the 5 MW marine motor. Our focus in the SuperMachines Business will continue to be marine propulsion motors and synchronous condensers. Future activity may also include HTS generators as opportunities for development and commercial sales arise.
Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing for HTS Rotating Machines. Our SuperMachines business currently operates out of a 27,000-square-foot facility in Westborough, MA. Operations conducted here include machine design, coil development, manufacturing and testing, exciter development, assembly and testing, and motor assembly and testing. We outsource the manufacture of copper-based stators, which we use in our HTS motors, to conventional motor manufacturers. We also outsource other components that are used in our HTS motors that are not unique to HTS rotating machines. The manufacture of the HTS coils, refrigeration system and exciter are completed internally along with the rotor assembly. During the last year, we outsourced the stator design, assembly and test of the 5 MW, 230-rpm ship propulsion motor under contract by the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Research to our subcontractor Alstom Power Conversion.
Our plan for future manufacturing, sales and marketing of HTS rotating machines is to form a business alliance with one or more motor manufacturers. We believe this approach will provide us with more effective and quicker paths to manufacture motors and generators, as well as access to established sales and distribution channels and experienced sales teams. We also believe this approach will accelerate market adoption of our new HTS rotating machines. We are currently working with Alstom, Northrop Grumman Marine Systems and Ideal Electric Holding Company (Ideal) as subcontractors for our rotating machine development and demonstration programs. We expect to expand these existing business alliances or to create new ones as we enter the commercial markets for HTS rotating machines over approximately the next two years.
Competition for HTS Rotating Machines. We face competition for our high-power HTS rotating machines from companies that manufacture traditional machines made with copper wires including: GE Industrial Systems, Siemens, Asea Brown Boveri Ltd. (ABB), Alstom, Ideal, Brush Industries, Inc. and Hitachi Ltd.
We also face competition from manufacturers of permanent magnet motors, which have been under development over the last decade. Permanent magnet motors are another technology being considered by the U.S. Navy for electric drives. Companies developing high-power permanent magnet motors include General Dynamics and DRS Technologies Inc. There are also at least two companies, Rockwell Automation and Siemens, that are developing HTS electric motors and who have demonstrated HTS motors over the last several years.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources, research and development, manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do. In addition, as HTS rotating machines markets develop, other large industrial companies may enter these fields and compete with us.
Power Electronic Systems Business
Our Power Electronic Systems business unit designs, develops, assembles, tests and sells power electronic converters that rapidly switch, control, and modulate power. This business unit is responsible for product development, marketing and sales of our proprietary PowerModule™ power electronic converter to OEMs, which integrate this product into electric motor drives, distributed and dispersed generation devices, such as micro-turbines, fuel cells and wind turbines, and power quality solutions, such as battery and flywheel-based uninterruptible power supplies. We expect that our PowerModule power converters will encompass power ratings from 60 to 1,000 kW per PowerModule power converter.
Our PowerModules utilize a proprietary printed circuit board design that enables us to incorporate a microprocessor into the power converter and create programmable power converters. Programmability is important because individual PowerModules or integrated stacks of PowerModules can be programmed to meet
46
the needs of different customers to control and condition varying levels of power from tens of kilowatts to megawatts across a wide range of applications.
Flexibility, scalability and high power density are key PowerModule™ power converter product features. We believe the PowerModule™ power converter design will allow us to reduce the manufacturing costs of power electronic converters at power levels above 60 kW.
In addition to PowerModule™ power converter hardware, our Power Electronic Systems business unit is responsible for software development for the PowerModule™ power converters, as well as for the software needed to integrate the PowerModule™ power converters into final systems.
Our primary commercial PowerModule™ product today has a power rating of 250 kW. This product is known as the PM250™ and it is the power converter we currently use in our commercial distributed superconductor magnetic energy storage (D-SMES), dynamic VAR (D-VAR®) and power quality industrial voltage restorer (PQ-IVR™) product lines.
We have completed the development of our next generation of PowerModule™ power converters, which we call the PowerModule 1000™, or PM1000™ power converter. The PM1000 power converter family features a scalable, modular and flexible design architecture. It is an intelligent and fully integrated power converter that has a compact package design and yields a very high power density of up to 130 Watts/cubic inch. Features of this design include:
| • | state-of-the-art IGBT technology; |
| • | scalable design; |
| • | flexible architecture; and |
| • | high power density. |
We have begun sales and marketing efforts on the PM1000™ power converter after successful testing of prototypes supported by a March 2002 development contract from the U.S. Navy’s Office of Naval Research (ONR). As part of its Advanced Electric Power Systems initiative, ONR is developing architectures for Power Electronics Building Blocks (PEBB) for intelligent, reconfigurable systems. We expect to develop low and medium voltage converters based on the PowerModule technology for ship propulsion and other electrical components that will be required for the future all-electric Navy. Power converters are expected to be key components in the integrated power architecture operating, for example, between the shipboard generators and the propulsion motors.
In April 2003, we received our first PM1000 power converter order, from Calnetix, for the supply of the power electronics associated with a 2 MW generator application for the British Royal Navy. With our highly differentiable power electronic converter product, we believe we are well positioned to become a market leader for advanced power electronics for power conversion at 60 kW and higher.
47
The Power Electronic Systems business unit also develops, markets and sells products that provide customer benefits further up the power electronics value chain by offering a line of power quality and reliability solutions based on our PowerModule™ power converters, as shown in the following chart.
Our power quality and reliability solutions are used in a variety of utility and industrial applications. The systems are based on our PowerModule™ power converters and may be integrated with a SMES device, which can store and inject large quantities of real power along with the reactive power from the PowerModules.™ Our commercial integrated power electronic systems include the following:
PQ-IVR™
Our PQ-IVR™ systems are installed in transmission substations that bring power into industrial manufacturing sites. These systems protect manufacturing operations from the adverse effects of momentary voltage sags. PQ-IVR™ systems detect voltage drops on the power lines coming into manufacturing sites and instantly inject power into the lines to restore the voltage to the required range of operating voltages. A PQ-IVR™ may include a SMES device along with the integrated PowerModules™ if the particular customer site requires the injection of real power in addition to the reactive power generated by the PowerModules.™ Our transmission planning team works with industrial customers to determine the optimum configuration for each industrial site. Our PQ-IVR™ systems protect entire manufacturing operations that have electrical loads over 5 MW (as opposed to lower power point-of-use protection devices that must be installed at various sites within the manufacturing operation). We believe our PQ-IVR™ systems provide a cost-effective solution to the problem of voltage sags, which can cost manufacturers millions of dollars in downtime, damaged equipment and lost work-in-process. A major target customer for PQ-IVR™ systems are semiconductor manufacturers because they are well aware of the impact of voltage sags on productivity and the resulting high cost of downtime.
48
D-SMES
Distributed SMES (D-SMES) systems protect electric utilities by stabilizing voltage in power grids through the simultaneous injection of large amounts of reactive power from an array of PowerModules™ and real power from the superconducting magnet. This restores the voltage of the power grid to normal levels. D-SMES systems enable operators to increase large-scale power flow through existing transmission lines, significantly increasing power grid asset utilization. D-SMES systems are also a cost-effective and readily deployable solution. Given these factors and the current federal emphasis on increasing transmission capacity and reducing related regulatory hurdles, we expect demand for D-SMES systems by utilities and transmission companies to grow as investment in grid infrastructure increases and regulatory barriers fall.
D-VAR®
Our Dynamic VAR (D-VAR®) product offers a powerful yet cost-effective way of regulating and stabilizing voltage levels by injecting reactive power (VARs) into the power grid at precise locations where voltage problems can occur. A D-VAR® system is based on our proprietary PowerModule™ power converters. The primary difference between the D-VAR® and D-SMES systems is that a D-VAR® system does not contain a SMES device. The decision of whether to incorporate a SMES device into a power grid reliability solution is dependent on site specific issues. This flexibility enables us to provide the most cost-effective solution for each application.
Transmission Planning Capabilities. Our Power Electronic Systems business unit has in-depth knowledge of and extensive experience in the design and structure of transmission and distribution grids. Its Transmission Planning Group uses sophisticated software programs to perform analyses of the effects of disturbances in power grids to determine grid reliability under normal and peak loading conditions. This group also analyzes the effects of the incorporation of standard technologies such as capacitors and static VAR compensators (SVCs) and advanced technologies such as HTS cables, D-SMES systems, D-VAR® systems and HTS synchronous condensers into power grids. They perform similar analyses to determine the optimum power quality solution for industrial manufacturing sites. Our Transmission Planning Group plays a significant role in the sales and marketing of our power electronic systems products and solutions.
Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing of Power Electronic Systems. Our Power Electronic Systems business unit operates out of facilities in New Berlin and Middleton, WI. In New Berlin, we design, develop and test our PowerModule™ power electronic converters in a state-of-the-art 50,000-square-foot facility. We outsource the manufacture of PowerModule™ power converters allowing us to focus on our core competency of design and final test of PowerModule™ systems. In our Middleton operation, we assemble and test components and PowerModule™ power converters for incorporation into our integrated power electronic systems such as D-SMES, D-VAR® and PQ-IVR™ systems. We made a decision to outsource the manufacture of the superconductor magnets allowing us to focus on our core competency of integrating components for our commercial power quality and reliability systems.
In April 2000, we entered into a co-marketing and sales alliance with GE Industrial Systems (GEIS), a business of the General Electric Corporation, to market and sell co-branded D-SMES systems. GEIS has been our exclusive channel to U.S. utilities for the last three years for D-SMES solutions. When we introduced the D-VAR® product in May 2002, GEIS also became our exclusive channel to U.S. utilities for this new product, which is also co-branded when sold to U.S. utilities. Our joint sales and marketing tactics include calls on customers using members of both our and the GEIS direct and regional sales teams. We believe the addition of the GEIS sales teams adds significant strength to our sales efforts. During fiscal 2003, we sold co-branded D-VAR® systems to PacifiCorp, BC Hydro, Northeast Utilities, Rayburn Country Electric and Illinois Power.
We also intend to jointly sell co-branded PQ-IVR™ systems with GEIS to certain industrial customers. Although we have jointly called on industrial customers and have provided sales quotes to several potential industrial customers, we have not yet closed a joint order for a PQ-IVR™ system. We believe this is due primarily
49
to the slow-down in the economy over the last several years, which has forced many industrial customers to defer purchases of capital equipment.
Under our co-marketing and sales agreement with GEIS, we sell integrated system to GEIS at a normal margin for the particular product and GEIS then sells the integrated system to the end customer typically with auxiliary equipment such as capacitor banks, transformers and switch gear.
In June 2003, we agreed to extend our co-marketing and sales alliance with GEIS for an additional three years under generally the same terms that were previously in place.
In September 2002 we signed a sales and marketing agreement with Singapore-based Bridex Technologies. This agreement provides our channel for marketing our integrated power electronic systems in the Asia/Pacific region.
Our sales of individual PowerModule™ power converters are managed by our direct sales force in the U.S. and in Europe. We have sold and intend to sell both individual PowerModules™ as well as integrated PowerModules™ for applications such as motor drives, uninterruptible power supplies, wind turbines, and distributed generation applications.
Competition for Power Electronic Systems. We face competition from other companies selling power reliability products, such as SVC (Static Var Compensator) and STATCOM (Static Reactive Compensation) produced by ABB, Alstom, Siemens and Mitsubishi Electric Power Products, Inc., dynamic voltage restorers produced by companies such as S&C Electric Company and ABB, and flywheels and battery-based UPS systems offered by various companies around the world. We do not know of any companies currently developing or selling commercial SMES products; however, there are at least two organizations developing SMES products, a government-sponsored program in Japan and ACCEL Instruments GmbH in Germany.
We face competition from companies that are developing power electronic converters for use in applications that we expect to compete with our PowerModule™ products. These companies include Ecostar, Inverpower, SatCon, Semikron and Xantrex.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial resources, research and development, manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do. In addition, as the power quality and reliability markets develop, other large industrial companies may enter these fields and compete with us.
Patents, Licenses and Trade Secrets
HTS Patent Background
Since the discovery of high temperature superconductors in 1986, the HTS industry has been characterized by rapid technical advances, which in turn have resulted in a large number of patents, including overlapping patents, relating to superconductivity being applied for and granted worldwide. As a result, the patent situation in the field of HTS technology and products is unusually complex.
An important part of our business strategy is to develop a strong patent position in all of our technology areas. Our patent portfolio comprises both patents we own and patents we license from others. We devote substantial resources to building a strong patent position and we believe that we have significantly strengthened our position in the past several years. As of June 30, 2003, we owned (either alone or jointly) more than 130 U.S. patents and had 57 U.S. patent applications (jointly or solely owned) on file. We also hold licenses from third parties covering over 115 issued U.S. patents and 36 U.S. patent applications. Together with the international counterparts of each of these patents, patent applications and licenses, we own more than 420 patents and patent applications worldwide, and have rights through exclusive and non-exclusive licenses to more than 380
50
additional patents and patent applications. We believe that our current patent position, together with our expected ability to obtain licenses from other parties to the extent necessary, will provide us with sufficient proprietary rights to develop and sell our products. However, for the reasons described below, there can be no assurance that this will be the case.
Despite the strength of our patent position, a number of U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications of third parties relate to our current products, to products we are developing, or to technology we are now using in the development or production of our products. We may need to acquire licenses to those patents, or to successfully contest the scope or validity of those patents, or to design around patented processes or applications.
If companies holding patents or patent applications that we need to license are competitors, we believe the strength of our patent portfolio will significantly improve our ability to enter into license or cross-license arrangements with these companies. In July 2003, we executed a cross license agreement with Sumitomo Electric Industries under which we licensed to each other North American and European patents related to 1G HTS wires, electromagnetic coils, electromagnets and current lead devices. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain all necessary licenses from competitors on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.
We may be required to obtain licenses to some patents and patent applications held by companies or other institutions, such as national laboratories or universities, not directly competing with us. Those organizations may not be interested in cross-licensing or, if willing to grant licenses, may charge unreasonable royalties. We have successfully obtained licenses from a number of such organizations, including Lucent Technologies, Superlink of New Zealand, ORNL, MIT, and Toshiba in Japan, with royalties we consider reasonable. Based on past experience, we expect that we will be able to obtain other necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms. However, there can be no assurance that we will be able to do so.
Failure to obtain all necessary licenses upon reasonable terms could significantly reduce the scope of our business and have a materially adverse effect on our results of operations. We do not now know the likelihood of successfully contesting the scope or validity of patents held by others. In any event, we could incur substantial costs in challenging the patents of other companies. Moreover, the nature of HTS patents is such that third parties are likely to challenge some of our patents or patent applications, and we could incur substantial costs in defending the scope and validity of our own patents or patent applications whether or not a challenge is ultimately successful.
Choice of HTS Materials
At any given time, we will have a preference for using one or a few specific HTS materials in the production of our products. Any HTS material we use is likely to be covered by one or more patents or patent applications held by other parties.
We have obtained licenses to patents and patent applications covering some HTS materials, including an exclusive license from Superlink and non-exclusive licenses from Lucent Technologies and Toshiba. However, we may have to obtain additional licenses to HTS materials.
HTS Wire Processing and Wire Architecture
We are concentrating on two main methods for processing HTS materials into wire. One produces multi-filamentary composite wire and the other produces coated conductor composite wire. Our strategy is to obtain a proprietary position in each of these methodologies through a combination of patents, licenses and proprietary know-how. If alternative processes become more promising in the future, we will also seek to develop a proprietary position in these alternative processes.
We have filed a number of patent applications that are applicable to multi-filamentary and coated conductor composite wire architectures. Some of these applications have been issued as patents in the U.S. and abroad, while
51
others are pending. We have acquired an exclusive license from MIT and a non-exclusive license from ORNL to intellectual property relating to coated conductors, and a non-exclusive license from Lucent Technologies and Toshiba relating to the production of multi-filamentary composite wire. We have acquired certain intellectual property rights in the coated conductor area through our collaboration with EPRI.
We have an exclusive license from MIT under an issued U.S. patent that covers the architecture of multi-filamentary (1G) and coated conductor (2G) composite HTS wire, specifically the composite of HTS ceramics and noble metals such as silver. The scope of this patent was the subject of an action in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts. In September 2002, the court ruled in our favor. We also filed for patents on laminate structures for this wire and on new architectures for coated conductor wire.
A number of other companies have also filed patent applications, and in some instances these have become issued patents, on various aspects of wire processing and wire architecture. To the extent that any of these issued or pending patents might cover the wire processing methodologies or wire architectures we use, we may be required to obtain licenses under those patents; however, there is no assurance that we will be able to do so.
HTS Component and Subsystem Fabrication Patents; HTS Application Patents
We have received several patents and filed a significant number of additional patent applications regarding:
| • | the design and fabrication of electromagnetic coils and electromagnets; |
| • | the integration of these products with an appropriate coolant or cryocooler; |
| • | the application of these products to specific end uses; and |
| • | HTS motor, generator and synchronous condenser designs. |
Since the HTS rotating machine field is relatively new, we believe we are building a particularly strong patent position in this area. A number of other companies have also filed, and in some instances have received, patents on various applications of HTS component and subsystem fabrication methods. If any existing or future patents cover any of these aspects of our operations, we may be required to obtain licenses under those patents.
Power Electronic Systems
We have received several patents and filed a significant number of additional patent applications on power quality and reliability systems, including the D-SMES concept. We have acquired a non-exclusive license from Argonne National Laboratory on a cryogenic connector for SMES applications. We believe we have a strong patent position in the SMES area, and have also filed a series of patents on our proprietary power electronic modules. We have licensed some of our patents specifically on SMES to third parties.
Trade Secrets
Some of the important technology used in our operations and products is not covered by any patent or patent application owned by or licensed to us. However, we take steps to maintain the confidentiality of this technology by requiring all employees and all consultants to sign confidentiality agreements and by limiting access to confidential information. However, no assurance can be given that these measures will prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of that information. In addition, there is no assurance that others, including our competitors, will not independently develop the same or comparable technology that is one of our trade secrets.
Employees
As of July 31, 2003, we employed a total of 266 persons, 28 of whom have a Ph.D. in materials science, physics or related fields. None of our employees are represented by a labor union. Retaining our key employees is important for achieving our goals and we are committed to developing a working environment that motivates and rewards our employees. At the present time, we believe that we have good relations with our employees.
52
Properties
We operate out of two facilities in Westborough, MA with a combined total of approximately 129,000 square feet of space. The Two Technology Drive facility in Westborough is under a lease that expires on May 31, 2009. The 121 Flanders Road facility is under a lease that expires on September 30, 2005.
On December 7, 2001, we completed construction and took occupancy of a company-owned 355,000-square-foot HTS wire manufacturing facility located at the Devens Commerce Center in Devens, MA.
We also operate out of facilities located in Middleton and New Berlin, WI with a combined total of approximately 83,000 square feet of space. The Middleton, WI facility comprises approximately 33,000 square feet of space in a building with a lease that expires on December 31, 2004. The New Berlin, WI facility comprises approximately 50,000 square feet of space under a lease that expires on September 30, 2011.
We decided to outsource our future requirements for LTS magnets used in our SMES systems, allowing us to focus on our core competency of integrating components for our commercial power quality and reliability systems. As a result, we ceased operations in a second building in Middleton, WI comprising approximately 27,000 square feet in March 2002.
Legal Proceedings
We are not involved in any legal proceedings other than routine litigation or related proceedings incidental to our business that we do not consider material.
53
The following table lists our directors, executive officers and key employees as of June 30, 2003:
| Name |
Age |
Position | ||
| Gregory J. Yurek |
56 | Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President | ||
| Kevin M. Bisson |
42 | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||
| Ross S. Gibson |
44 | Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer | ||
| Alexis P. Malozemoff |
59 | Executive Vice President and Chief Technical Officer | ||
| Charles W. Mayer |
57 | Vice President and General Manager, SuperMachines Business Unit | ||
| David Paratore |
35 | Senior Vice President and General Manager, AMSC Wires Business Unit | ||
| Thomas M. Rosa |
50 | Vice President of Finance and Accounting | ||
| Charles W. Stankiewicz |
44 | Vice President and General Manager, Power Electronic Systems Business Unit | ||
| Albert J. Baciocco, Jr. |
72 | Director | ||