Document/ExhibitDescriptionPagesSize 1: S-1 Registration Statement (General Form) HTML 2.23M
2: EX-4.02 Instrument Defining the Rights of Security Holders HTML 267K
3: EX-10.01 Material Contract HTML 59K
4: EX-10.05 Material Contract HTML 427K
5: EX-10.13 Material Contract HTML 191K
6: EX-10.14 Material Contract HTML 16K
7: EX-10.15 Material Contract HTML 27K
8: EX-10.16 Material Contract HTML 17K
9: EX-10.17 Material Contract HTML 19K
10: EX-10.18 Material Contract HTML 68K
11: EX-10.19 Material Contract HTML 162K
12: EX-10.20 Material Contract HTML 71K
13: EX-10.21 Material Contract HTML 52K
14: EX-10.22 Material Contract HTML 58K
15: EX-10.23 Material Contract HTML 20K
16: EX-10.24 Material Contract HTML 13K
17: EX-21.01 Subsidiaries of the Registrant HTML 10K
18: EX-23.02 Consent of Experts or Counsel HTML 8K
19: EX-23.03 Consent of Experts or Counsel HTML 8K
20: EX-23.04 Consent of Experts or Counsel HTML 10K
21: EX-99.01 Miscellaneous Exhibit HTML 12K
22: EX-99.02 Miscellaneous Exhibit HTML 11K
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
Copies to:
David A. Bell, Esq.
Laird H. Simons III, Esq.
Mark C. Stevens, Esq.
Fenwick & West LLP
Silicon Valley Center
801 California Street Mountain View, CA94041
(650) 988-8500
Robert V.
Gunderson, Jr., Esq.
Craig M. Schmitz, Esq.
Brooks Stough, Esq.
Gunderson Dettmer Stough Villeneuve
Franklin & Hachigian, LLP
155 Constitution Drive Menlo Park, CA94025
(650) 321-2400
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after the
effective date of this Registration Statement.
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, check the
following box. o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act
of 1933, check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering. o _
_
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following box and list the Securities Act registration statement
number of the earlier effective registration statement for the
same
offering. o _
_
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following box and list the Securities Act registration statement
number of the earlier effective registration statement for the
same
offering. o _
_
CALCULATION OF
REGISTRATION FEE
Proposed
Maximum
Amount of
Title of Each
Class of Securities to be Registered
Aggregate
Offering Price(1)
Registration
Fee
Common Stock, par value
$0.0001 per share
$92,000,000
$9,844
(1)
Estimated solely for the purpose of calculating the amount of
the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(o) under the
Securities Act of 1933.
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 that
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 preliminary prospectus is not complete and
may be changed. These securities may not be sold until the
registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an
offer to sell nor does it seek an offer to buy these securities
in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.
This is an initial public offering of shares of common stock of
Glu Mobile Inc. All of the shares of common stock are being sold
by Glu Mobile Inc.
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for the
common stock. It is currently estimated that the initial public
offering price per share will be between
$ and
$ . Application has been made for
listing on The NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol
“GLUU.”
See “Risk Factors” on page 8 to read about
factors you should consider before buying shares of the common
stock.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other
regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities
or passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this prospectus. Any
representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.
Per
Share
Total
Initial public offering price
$
$
Underwriting discount
$
$
Proceeds, before expenses, to Glu
Mobile
$
$
To the extent that the underwriters sell more
than shares
of common stock, the underwriters have the option to purchase up
to an
additional shares
from Glu Mobile at the initial public offering price less the
underwriting discount.
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in
New York, New York
on ,
2007.
stranded
award-winning games
world series of poker
super k.o. boxing
global broad distribution portfolio
diner dash
deer hunter 2
technology independent expertise
pgr mobile
centipede
get glu’d to mobile
glu.com
World Series of PokerR, WSOP and related designs are trademarks of Harrah#fs License Company,
LLC. Used PlayFirst logo are trademarks of PlayFirst, Inc. c 2005 PlayFirst, Inc. PGR and Project
Gotham Corporation. All rights reserved. The trademarks, copyrights and design rights in and
associated with AtariR CentipedeR c 2004 Atari, Inc. Super KO Boxing, Stranded and all related
characters and elements
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in
this prospectus. This summary does not contain all the
information you should consider before buying our common stock.
You should read the entire prospectus carefully, including the
section entitled “Risk Factors” and our consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus, before making an investment in our common
stock. Unless otherwise indicated, the terms “Glu
Mobile,”“Glu,”“we,”“us”
and “our” refer to Glu Mobile Inc., a Delaware
corporation, together with its consolidated subsidiaries.
Glu Mobile
Inc.
Glu Mobile is a leading global publisher of mobile games. We
have developed and published a portfolio of more than 100 casual
and traditional games to appeal to a broad cross section of the
over one billion subscribers served by our more than 150
wireless carriers and other distributors. We create games and
related applications based on third-party licensed brands and
other intellectual property, as well as on our own original
brands and intellectual property. Our games based on licensed
intellectual property include Deer Hunter, Diner
Dash, Monopoly, Sonic the Hedgehog, World
Series of Poker and Zuma. Our original games based on
our own intellectual property include Alpha Wing,
Ancient Empires, Blackjack Hustler, Stranded and
Super K.O. Boxing. We were one of the top three mobile
game publishers in terms of mobile game market share in North
America during the third quarter of 2006 as measured by NPD
Group, Inc., a market research firm, in its September 2006
“Mobile Game Track Highlight Report,” and in terms of
unit sales volume in North America and Europe among titles
tracked by m:metrics, another market research firm.
Our business leverages the marketing resources and distribution
infrastructure of wireless carriers and the brands and other
intellectual property of third-party content owners, allowing us
to focus our efforts on developing and publishing high-quality
mobile games. For the first nine months of 2006, our largest
wireless carrier customers in each region by revenues were
Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel, Cingular Wireless and
T-Mobile USA
in North America; Vodafone, Hutchinson 3G, Orange and
Telefónica Móviles in Europe; TelCel and Vivo in Latin
America; and Vodafone, Hutchinson 3G Australia and Telecom New
Zealand in Asia Pacific. Branded content owners, such as Atari,
Celador (from which we license the rights to Who Wants To Be
A Millionaire? in some European and Asian countries), Fox,
PlayFirst, PopCap Games, Sega Europe and Turner Broadcasting,
provide us with well-known consumer brands and other
intellectual property on which we have based mobile games.
Industry
Overview
Juniper Research, a market research firm, in its June 2006
“Mobile Games: Subscription & Download,
2006-2011”
report, estimates that the worldwide market for mobile games
will grow from $3.1 billion in 2006 to $10.5 billion
in 2009, a compound annual growth rate of 50.2%. We believe that
the rapid growth of the mobile game market has been driven by
continued advances in wireless communications technology,
proliferation of multimedia-enabled mobile handsets, increasing
availability of high-quality mobile games and increasing
end-user awareness of, and demand for, mobile games.
The mobile game market differs substantially from the
traditional console game market. Mobile games typically have
significantly lower development and distribution costs and
longer life cycles than console games. Console game sales depend
upon the product cycles of the consoles themselves with large
generational shifts between versions of each of the major
console platforms every few years. In contrast, the mobile
platform is characterized by a gradual evolution of features and
capabilities in the many new handsets introduced each year by a
large number of manufacturers and carriers. Consumers typically
use their console games in the confines of their home, while
mobile games are available in all the settings where consumers
take their mobile phones. Furthermore, console games are usually
developed for a few console platforms at most, which means that
the development costs are mostly associated with the original
creation and development of the game. However, once developed,
mobile games, may need to be customized, or ported, to more than
1,000 different handset models, many
with different technological requirements. Therefore, the
ability to port mobile games quickly and cost effectively can be
a competitive differentiator among mobile game publishers and a
barrier to entry for other potential market entrants.
Our Competitive
Strengths
We believe we have a proven capability to develop high-quality
mobile games that engage end users. Our portfolio includes a
variety of genres and is designed to appeal to the diverse
interests of the broad wireless subscriber population. We
believe that we will continue to be attractive to wireless
carriers, content owners and end users because of the following
strengths:
Diverse Portfolio of Award-Winning High-Quality Mobile
Games. We have developed and published more
than 100 casual and traditional games across a number of genres,
including action, board game, card/casino, puzzle, sports,
strategy/role playing games, or RPG, and TV/movie. No single
game contributed more than 10% of our revenues in 2005 or in the
first nine months of 2006. Based on numerical ratings by
industry review websites, IGN Entertainment, Modojo and WGWorld,
we ranked first in terms of average game quality for mobile
games released in the first nine months of 2006. We have
received numerous industry awards for our games, including IGN
Entertainment’s 2005 Editor’s Choice award for best
wireless puzzle game for Zuma, The Academy of Interactive
Arts and Sciences’ 2006 Game of the Year award for
Ancient Empires II, and the 2005 award for Best
Mobile Sports Game from CNET’s Gamespot for Deer
Hunter.
Global Scale in Distribution, Sales and
Marketing. We currently have agreements with
more than 150 wireless carriers and other distributors, which
together serve more than one billion subscribers worldwide. Our
games regularly receive premium placement on these
carriers’ game menus, or decks, accessed through mobile
handset screens. Given the small size of these screens, there
are significant advantages to being placed in the initial list
of games that an end user sees on the deck, sometimes referred
to as premium deck placement, rather than being placed lower on
the list where an end user may need to scroll or search to find
a game.
Strong Relationships with Branded Content
Owners. We have built relationships with a
number of key branded content owners. The content providers that
accounted for the largest percentage of our revenues for the
first nine months of 2006 were Atari, Celador (from which we
license the rights to Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? in
some European and Asian countries), Fox, PlayFirst, PopCap
Games, Sega Europe and Turner Broadcasting. In addition to these
relationships, we have recently licensed brands or other
intellectual property from Harrah’s, Hasbro, Microsoft and
Sony. We believe that branded content owners increasingly
understand the complexities of developing their own internal
mobile entertainment capabilities, and therefore increasingly
wish to work with publishers with a history of successfully
developing and publishing high-quality games, as well as with
the carrier relationships and marketing resources to publish
their games on a worldwide basis.
Proprietary Porting and Data Mining
Capabilities. We have developed proprietary
technologies and processes designed to increase the
profitability of our games. These technologies and processes
include a standardized development process designed to
facilitate efficient porting, a tool library covering each
handset model and ongoing work flow analysis tools. As of
September 30, 2006, we had the capability to port
approximately 40,000 SKUs per month, with each SKU characterized
by title per language per handset per carrier. Our data mining
capabilities provide us with the ability to analyze the revenue
potential of each game and to improve profitability through
ongoing decision support for additional porting, pricing and
marketing programs. Together, our porting and data mining
capabilities help us in our efforts to increase the initial
sales of each game and support continuing premium deck placement.
Experienced Management Team. In
addition to their experience in mobile games, our management
team has significant experience in the video game publishing,
wireless communications, technology and media industries. We
believe that this broad expertise allows us in a timely manner
to design, develop and deliver games and other mobile
entertainment applications that are designed to
address the demands of our market. We believe our management
team’s expertise and continuity is a significant
competitive advantage in the evolving mobile entertainment
publishing market.
Our
Strategy
Our goal is to be the leading global publisher of mobile games
and other mobile entertainment applications. To achieve this
goal, we plan to:
Continue to Create Award-Winning Games through Ongoing
Investment in Our Studio and Technical Development
Capabilities. Our creative and technical
teams are recognized in the industry for creating high-quality,
award-winning mobile games. Our technical teams leverage
proprietary technologies and standardized automated processes
that are designed to enable rapid, timely, high-quality and
cost-effective development and porting of mobile games. We
believe that this combination provides us with a competitive
advantage over other industry participants that have
traditionally outsourced porting and development or used more
manual processes.
Leverage and Grow Our Portfolio of
Titles. We have developed a diverse portfolio
of more than 100 games, including perennial titles that we
believe can produce revenues for significantly longer than the
typical 18 to 24 month revenue lifecycle for mobile games.
In addition, successful games give us the potential to develop
and publish a series of sequel titles, sometimes referred to as
franchise titles. For both perennial and sequel titles, we
leverage existing development, porting and marketing investments
and broad end-user awareness in order to increase the revenue
lifecycle of an existing game or increase the chance of success
for new games. Games for the mobile platform also provide
potential opportunities for us to publish or license our
intellectual property for use on other platforms such as online,
console or personal computer games. We plan to continue
developing perennial and franchise titles, and believe that our
proprietary technology and development process capabilities
provide us an advantage over our competitors in the coordinated
launches frequently required of multi-platform games.
Expand and Strengthen Our
Distribution. We believe that wireless
carriers are increasing their focus on the leading mobile game
publishers in order to improve the consistency and quality of
the games that they offer on their handsets. We intend to take
steps to increase our market share with our existing carriers
and distributors and add additional relationships, particularly
in new geographies. In addition, we have increased and expect to
continue to increase our non-carrier distribution capabilities
through alternative channels such as Internet portals and
“off-deck” aggregators.
Build Upon Our Position as a Leading Global Publisher to
Strengthen Licensing Relationships. We
believe that, as a leading independent publisher of mobile
games, we will continue to benefit from branded content
owners’ increasing recognition of the challenges associated
with mobile entertainment publishing. As a result of those
challenges, some branded content owners are reducing their own
internal mobile development efforts. We believe that branded
content owners are also becoming more reluctant to contract with
smaller mobile game publishers that do not have a reputation for
quality development or that do not have the breadth of carrier
relationships and technological capabilities necessary to
publish a game on a worldwide basis. We intend to capitalize on
these trends and on our reputation with non-mobile content
owners as a leading mobile partner to strengthen our existing
licensing relationships and develop additional relationships.
Gain Scale through Select
Acquisitions. We have acquired and integrated
two mobile game companies — Macrospace and iFone. We
believe that there may be future opportunities to acquire
content developers and publishers in the mobile entertainment or
complementary industries and we intend, where appropriate, to
take advantage of these opportunities.
Our business is subject to numerous risks, which are highlighted
in the section entitled “Risk Factors” immediately
following this prospectus summary. These risks represent
challenges to the successful implementation of our strategy and
to the growth and future profitability of our business. Some of
these risks are:
•
we have incurred significant losses since inception, including a
net loss of $17.9 million in 2005 and a net loss of
$10.0 million in the first nine months of 2006, and as of
September 30, 2006, we had an accumulated deficit of
$43.7 million;
•
we have only a limited history of generating revenues, and the
future revenue potential of our business in the emerging mobile
game market is uncertain;
•
the market in which we operate is highly competitive, and many
of our established competitors have significantly greater
resources than we do;
•
many of our mobile games are based on or incorporate
intellectual property that we license from third parties, and
most of our revenues are derived from these games; we may not be
able to renew these licenses or obtain additional
licenses; and
•
we currently rely on wireless carriers, in particular, Verizon
Wireless, Sprint Nextel, Cingular Wireless and Vodafone, to
market and distribute our products and thus to generate our
revenues, and the loss of or a change in any of these carrier
relationships could materially harm our business, operating
results and financial condition.
Corporate History
and Information
We were incorporated in Nevada in May 2001 as Cyent Studios,
Inc. and changed our name to Sorrent, Inc. later that year. In
November 2001, we incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary in
California, and, in December 2001, we merged the Nevada
corporation into this California subsidiary to
form Sorrent, Inc., a California corporation. In May 2005,
we changed our name to Glu Mobile Inc. Prior to completion of
this offering, we intend to reincorporate in Delaware. In
December 2004, we acquired Macrospace Limited, or Macrospace,
and in March 2006 we acquired iFone Holdings Limited, or iFone,
each a company registered in England and Wales.
Our principal executive offices are located at 1800 Gateway
Drive, Second Floor, San Mateo, California94404 and our
telephone number is
(650) 571-1550.
Our website address is www.glu.com. The information on our
website is not incorporated by reference into this prospectus
and should not be considered to be a part of this prospectus.
Alpha Wing is our registered trademark in the United
States, and Glu, Glu Mobile, our corporate logo, our
‘g’ character logo, Ancient Empires, Blackjack
Hustler, Stranded and Super K.O. Boxing are our
trademarks. Other trademarks appearing in this prospectus are
the property of their respective holders.
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering
shares
Use of proceeds
We intend to use approximately $12.1 million of the net
proceeds of this offering to repay in full the principal and
accrued interest on our outstanding loan from Pinnacle Ventures.
We expect to use the remaining net proceeds of this offering for
general corporate purposes, including working capital and
potential capital expenditures and acquisitions. See “Use
of Proceeds.”
Proposed NASDAQ Global Market symbol
GLUU
The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after
this offering is based on 63,169,489 shares of our common
stock outstanding as of September 30, 2006, and excludes:
•
8,158,311 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock
options outstanding as of September 30, 2006 with a
weighted average exercise price of $1.45 per share;
•
855,925 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options
granted after September 30, 2006 with a weighted average
exercise price of $3.51 per share;
•
687,223 shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants
outstanding as of September 30, 2006 with a weighted
average exercise price of $1.74 per share; and
•
shares
to be reserved for issuance under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan
and our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, each of which will
become effective on the first day that our common stock is
publicly traded and contains provisions that will automatically
increase its share reserve each year, as more fully described in
“Management — Employee Benefit Plans.”
Except as otherwise indicated, all information in this
prospectus assumes:
•
the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of our
convertible preferred stock into 47,040,945 shares of our
common stock upon the completion of this offering;
•
our reincorporation in Delaware prior to completion of this
offering;
•
the filing of our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation in Delaware immediately following the completion
of this offering; and
•
no exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase up
to an
additional shares
of our common stock in this offering.
The following tables present summary consolidated financial data
for our business. You should read this information together with
“Selected Consolidated Financial Data,”“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated
financial statements and related notes, each included elsewhere
in this prospectus.
We derived the statements of operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and the balance sheet data as of
September 30, 2006 from our audited consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. We derived the
statements of operations data for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 from our unaudited consolidated
financial statements included elsewhere in this prospectus. We
have prepared the unaudited consolidated financial statements on
the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements
and have included, in our opinion, all adjustments, consisting
only of normal recurring adjustments, that we consider necessary
to state fairly the results of operations for the nine months
ended September 30, 2005. Our historical results are not
necessarily indicative of the results we expect in the future,
and our results for the nine months ended September 30,2006 should not be considered indicative of results we expect
for the full fiscal year.
The pro forma per share data give effect to the conversion of
all our outstanding convertible preferred stock into common
stock upon the completion of this offering and adjustments to
eliminate accretion to preferred stock and the charges
associated with the cumulative effect change and subsequent
remeasurement to fair value of our preferred stock warrants. For
further information concerning the calculation of pro forma per
share information, please refer to note 2 of our notes to
consolidated financial statements.
on a pro forma basis to reflect (i) the automatic
conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into
47,040,945 shares of our common stock and (ii) the
reclassification of our preferred stock warrant liability to
additional paid-in capital upon the conversion of warrants to
purchase shares of our convertible preferred stock into warrants
to purchase shares of our common stock upon the completion of
this offering; and
•
on a pro forma as adjusted basis to reflect (i) the sale by
us of the shares of common
stock offered by this prospectus at an assumed initial public
offering price of $ per
share, after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions and estimated offering expenses, and (ii) the
use of approximately $12.1 million of the net proceeds of
this offering to repay in full the principal and accrued
interest on our loan from Pinnacle Ventures.
Each $1.00 increase or decrease in
the assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share would increase or
decrease, respectively, our cash, cash equivalents and
short-term investments, working capital, total assets and total
stockholders’ equity (deficit) by approximately
$ million, assuming the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
You should carefully consider the following risk factors and all
other information contained in this prospectus before purchasing
our common stock. If any of the following risks occurs, our
business, financial condition or results of operations could be
seriously harmed. In that case, the trading price of our common
stock could decline, and you might lose some or all of your
investment.
Risks Related to
Our Business
We have a history
of net losses, may incur substantial net losses in the future
and may not achieve profitability.
We have incurred significant losses since inception, including a
net loss of $8.3 million in 2004, a net loss of
$17.9 million in 2005 and a net loss of $10.0 million
in the first nine months of 2006. As of September 30, 2006,
we had an accumulated deficit of $43.7 million. We expect
to continue to increase expenses as we implement initiatives
designed to continue to grow our business, including, among
other things, the development and marketing of new games, plans
for further international expansion, expansion of our
infrastructure, acquisition of content, and general and
administrative expenses associated with being a public company.
If our revenues do not increase to offset these expected
increases in operating expenses, we will continue to incur
significant losses and will not become profitable. Our revenue
growth in recent periods should not be considered indicative of
our future performance. In fact, in future periods, our revenues
could decline. Accordingly, we may not be able to achieve
profitability in the future.
We have a limited
operating history in an emerging market, which may make it
difficult to evaluate our business.
We were incorporated in May 2001 and began selling mobile games
in July 2002. Accordingly, we have only a limited history of
generating revenues, and the future revenue potential of our
business in this emerging market is uncertain. As a result of
our short operating history, we have limited financial data that
can be used to evaluate our business. Any evaluation of our
business and our prospects must be considered in light of our
limited operating history and the risks and uncertainties
encountered by companies in our stage of development. As an
early stage company in the emerging mobile entertainment
industry, we face increased risks, uncertainties, expenses and
difficulties. To address these risks and uncertainties, we must
do the following:
•
maintain our current, and develop new, wireless carrier
relationships;
•
maintain and expand our current, and develop new, relationships
with third-party branded content owners;
•
retain or improve our current revenue-sharing arrangements with
carriers and third-party branded content owners;
•
maintain and enhance our own brands;
•
continue to develop new high-quality mobile games that achieve
significant market acceptance;
•
continue to port existing mobile games to new mobile handsets;
•
continue to develop and upgrade our technology;
•
continue to enhance our information processing systems;
•
increase the number of end users of our games;
•
maintain and grow our non-carrier, or “off-deck,”
distribution, including through our website and third-party
direct-to-consumer
distributors;
expand our development capacity in countries with lower costs;
•
execute our business and marketing strategies successfully;
•
respond to competitive developments; and
•
attract, integrate, retain and motivate qualified personnel.
We may be unable to accomplish one or more of these objectives,
which could cause our business to suffer. In addition,
accomplishing many of these efforts might be very expensive,
which could adversely impact our operating results and financial
condition.
Our financial
results could vary significantly from quarter to quarter and are
difficult to predict.
Our revenues and operating results could vary significantly from
quarter to quarter because of a variety of factors, many of
which are outside of our control. As a result, comparing our
operating results on a
period-to-period
basis may not be meaningful. In addition, we may not be able to
predict our future revenues or results of operations. We base
our current and future expense levels on our internal operating
plans and sales forecasts, and our operating costs are to a
large extent fixed. As a result, we may not be able to reduce
our costs sufficiently to compensate for an unexpected shortfall
in revenues, and even a small shortfall in revenues could
disproportionately and adversely affect financial results for
that quarter. Individual games and carrier relationships
represent meaningful portions of our revenues and net loss in
any quarter. We may incur significant or unanticipated expenses
when licenses are renewed. In addition, any payments due to us
from carriers for revenues that are recognized on a cash basis
may be delayed because of changes or issues with those
carriers’ processes.
In addition to other risk factors discussed in this section,
factors that may contribute to the variability of our quarterly
results include:
•
the number of new mobile games released by us and our
competitors;
•
the timing of release of new games by us and our competitors,
particularly those that may represent a significant portion of
revenues in a period;
•
the popularity of new games and games released in prior periods;
•
changes in prominence of deck placement for our leading games
and those of our competitors;
•
the expiration of existing content licenses for particular games;
•
the timing of charges related to impairments of goodwill,
intangible assets, prepaid royalties and guarantees;
•
changes in pricing policies by us, our competitors or our
carriers and other distributors;
•
changes in the mix of original and licensed games, which have
varying gross margins;
•
the timing of successful mobile handset launches;
•
the seasonality of our industry;
•
fluctuations in the size and rate of growth of overall consumer
demand for mobile games and related content;
•
strategic decisions by us or our competitors, such as
acquisitions, divestitures, spin-offs, joint ventures, strategic
investments or changes in business strategy;
accounting rules governing recognition of revenue;
•
the timing of compensation expense associated with equity
compensation grants; and
•
decisions by us to incur additional expenses, such as increases
in marketing or research and development.
As a result of these and other factors, our operating results
may not meet the expectations of investors or public market
analysts who choose to follow our company. Failure to meet
market expectations would likely result in decreases in the
trading price of our common stock.
The markets in
which we operate are highly competitive, and many of our
competitors have significantly greater resources than we
do.
The development, distribution and sale of mobile games is a
highly competitive business. For end users, we compete primarily
on the basis of brand, game quality and price. For wireless
carriers, we compete for deck placement based on these factors,
as well as historical performance and perception of sales
potential and relationships with licensors of brands and other
intellectual property. For content and brand licensors, we
compete based on royalty and other economic terms, perceptions
of development quality, porting abilities, speed of execution,
distribution breadth and relationships with carriers. We also
compete for experienced and talented employees.
Our primary competitors include Digital Chocolate, Electronic
Arts (EA Mobile), Gameloft, Hands-On Mobile, I-play, Namco and
THQ. In the future, likely competitors include major media
companies, traditional video game publishers, content
aggregators, mobile software providers and independent mobile
game publishers. Carriers may also decide to develop, internally
or through a managed third-party developer, and distribute their
own mobile games. If carriers enter the mobile game market as
publishers, they might refuse to distribute some or all of our
games or might deny us access to all or part of their networks.
Some of our competitors’ and our potential
competitors’ advantages over us, either globally or in
particular geographic markets, include the following:
•
significantly greater revenues and financial resources;
•
stronger brand and consumer recognition;
•
the capacity to leverage their marketing expenditures across a
broader portfolio of mobile and non-mobile products;
•
pre-existing relationships with brand owners or carriers;
•
greater resources to make acquisitions;
•
lower labor and development costs; and
•
broader distribution.
If we are unable to compete effectively or we are not as
successful as our competitors in our target markets, our sales
could decline, our margins could decline and we could lose
market share, any of which would materially harm our business,
operating results and financial condition.
Failure to renew
our existing brand and content licenses on favorable terms or at
all and to obtain additional licenses could harm our
business.
Revenues derived from mobile games and other applications based
on or incorporating brands or other intellectual property
licensed from third parties accounted for 77.1% and 85.0% of our
revenues in 2005 and the first nine months of 2006,
respectively. During the first nine months of 2006, revenues
derived from our four largest licensors, Atari, Celador, Fox and
PopCap Games, together accounted for approximately 62.3% of our
revenues. Even if mobile games based on licensed content
or brands remain popular, any of our licensors could decide not
to renew our existing license or not to license additional
intellectual property and instead license to our competitors or
develop and publish its own mobile games or other applications,
competing with us in the marketplace. Many of these licensors
already develop games for other platforms, and may have
significant experience and development resources available to
them should they decide to compete with us rather than license
to us.
We have both exclusive and non-exclusive licenses and both
licenses that are global and licenses that are limited to
specific geographies, often with other mobile game publishers
having rights to geographies not covered by our licenses. Our
licenses generally have terms that range from two to five years,
with the primary exceptions being our six-year licenses covering
World Series of Poker and Deer Hunter 2 and our
seven-year license covering Kasparov Chess. Licenses for
intellectual property that terminate prior to 2008 and during
2008 represented 55.0% and 18.3%, respectively, of our revenues
in the first nine months of 2006. Some of the licenses that we
have inherited through acquisitions provide that the licensor
owns the intellectual property that we develop in the mobile
version of the game and that, when our license expires, the
licensor can transfer that intellectual property to a new
licensee. Increased competition for licenses may lead to larger
guarantees, advances and royalties that we must pay to our
licensors, which could significantly increase our cost of
revenues and cash usage. We may be unable to renew these
licenses or to renew them on terms favorable to us, and we may
be unable to secure alternatives in a timely manner. Failure to
maintain or renew our existing licenses or to obtain additional
licenses would impair our ability to introduce new mobile games
or continue to offer our current games, which would materially
harm our business, operating results and financial condition.
Some of our existing licenses impose, and licenses that we
obtain in the future might impose, development, distribution and
marketing obligations on us. If we breach our obligations, our
licensors might have the right to terminate the license or
change an exclusive license to a non-exclusive license, which
would harm our business, operating results and financial
condition.
Even if we are successful in gaining new licenses or extending
existing licenses, we may fail to anticipate the entertainment
preferences of our end users when making choices about which
brands or other content to license. If the entertainment
preferences of end users shift to content or brands owned or
developed by companies with which we do not have relationships,
we may be unable to establish and maintain successful
relationships with these newly popular developers and owners,
which would materially harm our business, operating results and
financial condition. In addition, some rights are licensed from
licensors that have or may develop financial difficulties, and
may enter into bankruptcy protection under U.S. federal law
or in other countries. If any of our licensors files for
bankruptcy, our licenses might be impaired or voided, which
could materially harm our business, operating results and
financial condition.
We currently rely
on wireless carriers, in particular Verizon Wireless, Sprint
Nextel, Cingular Wireless and Vodafone, to market and distribute
our games and thus to generate our revenues. The loss of or a
change in any of these significant carrier relationships could
materially harm our business.
Our future success is highly dependent upon maintaining
successful relationships with the wireless carriers with which
we currently work and establishing new carrier relationships in
geographies where we have not yet established a significant
presence. A significant portion of our revenues is derived from
a very limited number of carriers. For the first nine months of
2006, we derived approximately 20.9% of our revenues from
subscribers of Verizon Wireless, 12.0% of our revenues from
subscribers of Sprint Nextel, 11.4% of our revenues from
subscribers of Cingular Wireless and 10.7% of our revenues from
subscribers of Vodafone. During 2005, we derived approximately
24.3%, 11.5%, 11.9% and 6.2%, respectively, of our revenues from
subscribers of these carriers. In 2005 and the first nine months
of 2006, subscribers from carriers representing the next ten
largest sources of our revenues represented 25.6% and 26.4% of
our revenues, respectively, although some of the
carriers represented in this group varied from period to period.
We expect that we will continue to generate a significant
portion of our revenues through distribution relationships with
a very limited number of carriers for the foreseeable future.
Our failure to maintain our relationships with these carriers
would materially harm our business, operating results and
financial condition.
Our carrier agreements do not establish us as the exclusive
provider of mobile games with the carriers and typically have a
term of one or two years with automatic renewal provisions upon
expiration of the initial term, absent a contrary notice from
either party. In addition, the carriers often can terminate
these agreements early and, in some instances, at any time
without cause, which could give them the ability to renegotiate
economic terms. The agreements generally do not obligate the
carriers to market or distribute any of our games. In many of
these agreements, we warrant that our games do not contain
libelous or obscene content, do not contain material defects or
viruses, and do not violate third-party intellectual property
rights and we indemnify the carrier for any breach of a third
party’s intellectual property. In addition, our agreements
with a substantial minority of our carriers, including Verizon
Wireless, allow the carrier to set the retail price at a level
different from the price implied by our negotiated revenue
split, without a corresponding change to our wholesale price to
the carrier. If one of these carriers raises the retail price of
one of our games, unit demand for that game might decline,
reducing our revenues, without necessarily reducing, and perhaps
increasing, the total revenues that the carrier receives from
sales of that game. Many other factors outside our control could
impair our ability to generate revenues through a given carrier,
including the following:
•
the carrier’s preference for our competitors’ mobile
games rather than ours;
•
the carrier’s decision not to include or highlight our
games on the deck of its mobile handsets;
•
the carrier’s decision to discontinue the sale of our
mobile games or all mobile games like ours;
•
the carrier’s decision to offer games to its subscribers
without charge or at reduced prices;
•
the carrier’s decision to require market development funds
from publishers like us;
•
the carrier’s decision to restrict or alter subscription or
other terms for downloading our games;
•
a failure of the carrier’s merchandising, provisioning or
billing systems;
•
the carrier’s decision to offer its own competing mobile
games; and
•
consolidation among carriers.
If any of our carriers decides not to market or distribute our
games or decides to terminate, not renew or modify the terms of
its agreement with us or if there is consolidation among
carriers generally, we may be unable to replace the affected
agreement with acceptable alternatives, causing us to lose
access to that carrier’s subscribers, which could
materially harm our business, operating results and financial
condition.
End user tastes
are continually changing and are often unpredictable; if we fail
to develop and publish new mobile games that achieve market
acceptance, our sales would suffer.
Our business depends on developing and publishing mobile games
that wireless carriers will place on their decks and end users
will buy. We must continue to invest significant resources in
licensing efforts, research and development, marketing and
regional expansion to enhance our offering of games and
introduce new games, and we must make decisions about these
matters well in advance of product release in order to implement
them in a timely manner. Our success depends, in part, on
unpredictable and volatile factors beyond our control, including
end-user preferences, competing games and the availability of
other entertainment activities. If our games and related
applications are not responsive to the requirements of our
carriers or the entertainment preferences of end users, or they
are not brought to market in a timely and effective manner, our
business, operating results and financial condition would be
harmed. Even if our games are successfully introduced and
initially adopted, a subsequent shift in our carriers or the
entertainment preferences of end users could cause a decline in
our games’ popularity that could materially reduce our
revenues and harm our business, operating results and financial
condition.
Inferior deck
placement would likely adversely impact our revenues, operating
results and financial condition.
Wireless carriers provide a limited selection of games that are
accessible to their subscribers through a deck on their mobile
handsets. The inherent limitation on the number of games
available on the deck is a function of the limited screen size
of handsets and carriers’ perceptions of the depth of menus
and numbers of choices end users will generally utilize.
Carriers typically provide one or more top level menus
highlighting games that are recent top sellers, that the carrier
believes will become top sellers or that the carrier otherwise
chooses to feature, in addition to a link to a menu of
additional games sorted by genre. We believe that deck placement
on the top level or featured menu or toward the top of
genre-specific or other menus, rather than lower down or in
sub-menus,
is likely to result in games achieving a greater degree of
commercial success. If carriers choose to give our games less
favorable deck placement, our games may be less successful than
we anticipate and our business, operating results and financial
condition may be materially harmed.
We depend on a
limited number of mobile games for a significant portion of our
revenues.
In our industry, new games are frequently introduced, but a
relatively small number of games account for a significant
portion of industry sales. Similarly, a significant portion of
our revenues comes from a limited number of mobile games,
although the games in that group have shifted over time. For
example, in 2005 and in the first nine months of 2006, we
generated approximately 52.8% and 57.0% of our revenues,
respectively, from our top ten games, but no individual game
represented more than 10% of our revenues in either period. We
expect to release a relatively small number of new games each
year for the foreseeable future. If these games are not
successful, our revenues could be limited and our business and
operating results would suffer in both the year of release and
thereafter.
In addition, the limited number of games that we release in a
year may contribute to fluctuations in our operating results.
Therefore, our reported results at quarter and year end may be
affected based on the release dates of our products, which could
result in volatility in the price of our common stock. If our
competitors develop more successful games, offer them at lower
prices based on payment models, such as
pay-for-play
or subscription-based models, perceived as offering a better
value proposition, or if we do not continue to develop
consistently high-quality and well-received games, our business,
operating results and financial condition would be harmed.
If we are
unsuccessful in establishing and increasing awareness of our
brand and recognition of our mobile games or if we incur
excessive expenses promoting and maintaining our brand or our
games, our business could be harmed.
We believe that establishing and maintaining our brand is
critical to retaining and expanding our existing relationships
with carriers and content licensors, as well as developing new
relationships. Promotion of the Glu brand will depend on our
success in providing high-quality mobile games. Similarly,
recognition of our games by end users will depend on our ability
to develop engaging games of high quality with attractive
titles. However, our success will also depend, in part, on the
services and efforts of third parties, over which we have little
or no control. For instance, if our wireless carriers fail to
provide high levels of service, our end users’ ability to
access our games may be interrupted, which may adversely affect
our brand. If end users, branded content owners and carriers do
not perceive our existing games as high-quality or if we
introduce new games that are not favorably received by our end
users and carriers, then we may be unsuccessful in building
brand recognition and brand loyalty in the marketplace. In
addition, globalizing and extending our brand and recognition of
our games will be costly and will involve extensive management
time to execute successfully. Further, the markets in which we
operate are highly competitive and some of our competitors, such
as
Electronic Arts (EA Mobile), already have substantially
more brand name recognition and greater marketing resources than
we do. If we fail to increase brand awareness and consumer
recognition of our games, our potential revenues could be
limited, our costs could increase and our business, operating
results and financial condition could suffer.
Our business and
growth may suffer if we are unable to hire and retain key
personnel, who are in high demand.
We depend on the continued contributions of our senior
management and other key personnel, especially L. Gregory
Ballard and Albert A. “Rocky” Pimentel. The loss of
the services of any of our executive officers or other key
employees could harm our business. All of our
U.S. executive officers and key employees are at-will
employees, which means they may terminate their employment
relationship with us at any time. None of our
U.S. employees is bound by a contractual non-competition
agreement, which could make us vulnerable to recruitment efforts
by our competitors. Internationally, while some employees are
bound by non-competition agreements, we may experience
difficulty in enforcing these agreements with our employees and
contractors. We do not maintain a key-person life insurance
policy on any of our officers or other employees.
Our future success also depends on our ability to identify,
attract and retain highly skilled technical, managerial,
finance, marketing and creative personnel. We face intense
competition for qualified individuals from numerous technology,
marketing and mobile entertainment companies. In addition,
competition for qualified personnel is particularly intense in
the San Francisco Bay Area, where our headquarters are
located. Further, our principal overseas operations are based in
London and Hong Kong, cities that, similar to our headquarters
region, have high costs of living and consequently high
compensation standards. Qualified individuals are in high
demand, and we may incur significant costs to attract them. We
may be unable to attract and retain suitably qualified
individuals who are capable of meeting our growing creative,
operational and managerial requirements, or may be required to
pay increased compensation in order to do so, and if we are
unable to attract and retain the qualified personnel we need to
succeed, our business would suffer.
Volatility or lack of performance in our stock price may also
affect our ability to attract and retain our key employees. Many
of our senior management personnel and other key employees have
become, or will soon become, vested in a substantial amount of
stock or stock options. Employees may be more likely to leave us
if the shares they own or the shares underlying their options
have significantly appreciated in value relative to the original
purchase price of the shares or the exercise prices of the
option, or if the exercise prices of the options that they hold
are significantly above the market price of our common stock. If
we are unable to retain our employees, our business, operating
results and financial condition would be harmed.
Growth may place
significant demands on our management and our
infrastructure.
We have experienced, and may continue to experience, growth in
our business through internal growth and acquisitions. This
growth has placed, and may continue to place, significant
demands on our management and our operational and financial
infrastructure. In particular, continued growth could strain our
ability to:
•
develop and improve our operational, financial and management
controls;
•
enhance our reporting systems and procedures;
•
recruit, train and retain highly skilled personnel;
•
maintain our quality standards; and
•
maintain branded content owner, wireless carrier and end-user
satisfaction.
Managing our growth will require significant expenditures and
allocation of valuable management resources. If we fail to
achieve the necessary level of efficiency in our organization as
it grows, our business, operating results and financial
condition would be harmed.
The acquisition
of other companies, businesses or technologies could result in
operating difficulties, dilution and other harmful
consequences.
We have made recent acquisitions and, although we have no
present understandings, commitments or agreements to do so, we
may pursue further acquisitions, any of which could be material
to our business, operating results and financial condition.
Future acquisitions could divert management’s time and
focus from operating our business. In addition, integrating an
acquired company, business or technology is risky and may result
in unforeseen operating difficulties and expenditures. We may
also use a portion of the net proceeds of this offering for the
acquisition of, or investment in, companies, technologies,
products or assets that complement our business. Future
acquisitions or dispositions could result in potentially
dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our
common stock, the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or
amortization expenses, or in-process research and development
costs, any of which could harm our financial condition and
operating results. Future acquisitions may also require us to
obtain additional financing, which may not be available on
favorable terms or at all.
International acquisitions involve risks related to integration
of operations across different cultures and languages, currency
risks and the particular economic, political and regulatory
risks associated with specific countries.
Some or all of these issues may result from our acquisitions of
Macrospace in December 2004 and iFone in March 2006, each of
which is based in the United Kingdom. If the anticipated
benefits of either of these or future acquisitions do not
materialize, we experience difficulties integrating iFone or
businesses acquired in the future, or other unanticipated
problems arise, our business, operating results and financial
condition may be harmed.
In addition, a significant portion of the purchase price of
companies we acquire may be allocated to acquired goodwill and
other intangible assets, which must be assessed for impairment
at least annually. In the future, if our acquisitions do not
yield expected returns, we may be required to take charges to
our earnings based on this impairment assessment process, which
could harm our operating results.
We face added
business, political, regulatory, operational, financial and
economic risks as a result of our international operations and
distribution, any of which could increase our costs and hinder
our growth.
International sales represented approximately 41.8% and 44.6% of
our revenues for 2005 and the first nine months of 2006,
respectively. In addition, as part of our international efforts,
we acquired U.K.-based Macrospace in December 2004, opened our
Hong Kong office in July 2005, expanded our presence in the
European market with our acquisition of iFone in March 2006 and
opened additional offices in Brazil, France and Germany in the
second half of 2006. We expect to open additional international
offices, and we expect international sales to continue to be an
important component of our revenues. Risks affecting our
international operations include:
•
challenges caused by distance, language and cultural differences;
•
multiple and conflicting laws and regulations, including
complications due to unexpected changes in these laws and
regulations;
•
the burdens of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws and
regulations;
•
higher costs associated with doing business internationally;
•
difficulties in staffing and managing international operations;
greater fluctuations in sales to end users and through carriers
in developing countries, including longer payment cycles and
greater difficulty collecting accounts receivable;
•
protectionist laws and business practices that favor local
businesses in some countries;
•
foreign tax consequences;
•
foreign exchange controls that might prevent us from
repatriating income earned in countries outside the United
States;
•
price controls;
•
the servicing of regions by many different carriers;
•
imposition of public sector controls;
•
political, economic and social instability;
•
restrictions on the export or import of technology;
•
trade and tariff restrictions;
•
variations in tariffs, quotas, taxes and other market
barriers; and
•
difficulties in enforcing intellectual property rights in
countries other than the United States.
In addition, developing user interfaces that are compatible with
other languages or cultures can be expensive. As a result, our
ongoing international expansion efforts may be more costly than
we expect. Further, expansion into developing countries subjects
us to the effects of regional instability, civil unrest and
hostilities, and could adversely affect us by disrupting
communications and making travel more difficult.
These risks could harm our international expansion efforts,
which, in turn, could materially and adversely affect our
business, operating results and financial condition.
If we fail to
deliver our games at the same time as new mobile handset models
are commercially introduced, our sales may suffer.
Our business is dependent, in part, on the commercial
introduction of new handset models with enhanced features,
including larger, higher resolution color screens, improved
audio quality, and greater processing power, memory, battery
life and storage. We do not control the timing of these handset
launches. Some new handsets are sold by carriers with one or
more games or other applications pre-loaded, and many end users
who download our games do so after they purchase their new
handsets to experience the new features of those handsets. Some
handset manufacturers give us access to their handsets prior to
commercial release. If one or more major handset manufacturers
were to cease to provide us access to new handset models prior
to commercial release, we might be unable to introduce
compatible versions of our games for those handsets in
coordination with their commercial release, and we might not be
able to make compatible versions for a substantial period
following their commercial release. If, because of game launch
delays, we miss the opportunity to sell games when new handsets
are shipped or our end users upgrade to a new handset, or if we
miss the key holiday selling period, either because the
introduction of a new handset is delayed or we do not deploy our
games in time for the holiday selling season, our business,
operating results and financial condition would likely suffer.
Wireless carriers
generally control the price charged for our mobile games and the
billing and collection for sales of our mobile games and could
make decisions detrimental to us.
Wireless carriers generally control the price charged for our
mobile games either by approving or establishing the price of
the games charged to their subscribers. Some of our carrier
agreements also restrict our ability to change prices. In cases
where carrier approval is required, approvals may not be
granted in a timely manner or at all. A failure or delay in
obtaining these approvals, the prices established by the
carriers for our games, or changes in these prices could
adversely affect market acceptance of those games. Similarly,
for the significant minority of our carriers, including Verizon
Wireless, when we make changes to a pricing plan (the wholesale
price and the corresponding suggested retail price based on our
negotiated revenue-sharing arrangement), adjustments to the
actual retail price charged to end users may not be made in a
timely manner or at all (even though our wholesale price was
reduced). A failure or delay by these carriers in adjusting the
retail price for our games, could adversely affect sales volume
and our revenues for those games.
Carriers and other distributors also control billings and
collections for our games, either directly or through
third-party service providers. If our carriers or their
third-party service providers cause material inaccuracies when
providing billing and collection services to us, our revenues
may be less than anticipated or may be subject to refund at the
discretion of the carrier. This could harm our business,
operating results and financial condition.
We may be unable
to develop and introduce in a timely way new mobile games, and
our games may have defects, which could harm our
brand.
The planned timing and introduction of new original mobile games
and games based on licensed intellectual property are subject to
risks and uncertainties. Unexpected technical, operational,
deployment, distribution or other problems could delay or
prevent the introduction of new games, which could result in a
loss of, or delay in, revenues or damage to our reputation and
brand. If any of our games is introduced with defects, errors or
failures, we could experience decreased sales, loss of end
users, damage to our carrier relationships and damage to our
reputation and brand. Our attractiveness to branded content
licensors might also be reduced. In addition, new games may not
achieve sufficient market acceptance to offset the costs of
development, particularly when the introduction of a game is
substantially later than a planned
“day-and-date”
launch, which could materially harm our business, operating
results and financial condition.
If we fail to
maintain and enhance our capabilities for porting games to a
broad array of mobile handsets, our attractiveness to wireless
carriers and branded content owners will be impaired, and our
sales could suffer.
Once developed, a mobile game may be required to be ported to,
or converted into separate versions for, more than 1,000
different handset models, many with different technological
requirements. These include handsets with various combinations
of underlying technologies, user interfaces, keypad layouts,
screen resolutions, sound capabilities and other
carrier-specific customizations. If we fail to maintain or
enhance our porting capabilities, our sales could suffer,
branded content owners might choose not to grant us licenses and
carriers might choose to give our games less desirable deck
placement or not to give our games placement on their decks at
all.
Changes to our game design and development processes to address
new features or functions of handsets or networks might cause
inefficiencies in our porting process or might result in more
labor intensive porting processes. In addition, we anticipate
that in the future we will be required to port existing and new
games to a broader array of handsets. If we utilize more labor
intensive porting processes, our margins could be significantly
reduced and it might take us longer to port games to an
equivalent number of handsets. This, in turn, could harm our
business, operating results and financial condition.
If our
independent, third-party developers cease development of new
games for us and we are unable to find comparable replacements,
our competitive position may be adversely impacted.
We rely on independent third-party developers to develop some of
our games, which subjects us to the following risks:
•
key developers who worked for us in the past may choose to work
for or be acquired by our competitors;
•
developers currently under contract may try to renegotiate our
agreements with them on terms less favorable to us; and
•
our developers may be unable or unwilling to allocate sufficient
resources to complete our games in a timely or satisfactory
manner or at all.
If our developers terminate their relationships with us or
negotiate agreements with terms less favorable to us, we may
have to reduce the number of games that we intend to introduce,
delay the introduction of some game or increase our internal
development staff, which would be a time-consuming and
potentially costly process, and, as a result, our business,
operating results and financial condition could be harmed.
If one or more of
our games were found to contain hidden, objectionable content,
our business could suffer.
Historically, many video games have been designed to include
hidden content and gameplay features that are accessible through
the use of in-game cheat codes or other technological means that
are intended to enhance the gameplay experience. For example,
Super K.O. Boxing includes additional characters and game
modes that are available with a code (usually provided to a
player after accomplishing a certain level of achievement in the
game). Such features have been common in console and computer
games. However, in several recent cases, hidden content or
features have been found to be included in other
publishers’ products by an employee who was not authorized
to do so or by an outside developer without the knowledge of the
publisher. From time to time, some of this hidden content and
these hidden features have contained profanity, graphic violence
and sexually explicit or otherwise objectionable material. Our
design and porting process and the constraints on the file size
of our games reduce the possibility of hidden, objectionable
content from appearing in the games we publish. Nonetheless,
these processes and constraints may not prevent this content
from being included in our games. If a game we published were
found to contain hidden, objectionable content, the wireless
carriers and other distributors of our games could refuse to
sell it, consumers could refuse to buy it or demand a refund of
their money, and, if based on licensed content, the licensor
could demand that we incur significant expense to remove the
objectionable content from the game and all ported versions of
the game. This could have a materially negative impact on our
business, operating results and financial condition. In
addition, our reputation could be harmed, which could impact
sales of other games we sell and our attractiveness to content
licensors and carriers or other distributors of our games. If
any of these consequences were to occur, our business, operating
results and financial condition could be significantly harmed.
If we fail to
maintain an effective system of internal controls, we might not
be able to report our financial results accurately or prevent
fraud; in that case, our stockholders could lose confidence in
our financial reporting, which would harm our business and could
negatively impact the price of our stock.
Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide
reliable financial reports and prevent fraud. In addition,
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 will require
us to evaluate and report on our internal control over financial
reporting and have our independent registered public accounting
firm attest to our evaluation beginning with our Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
for the year ending December 31, 2008. We are in the
process of preparing and implementing an internal plan of
action for compliance with Section 404 and strengthening
and testing our system of internal controls to provide the basis
for our report. The process of implementing our internal
controls and complying with Section 404 will be expensive
and time consuming, and will require significant attention of
management. We cannot be certain that these measures will ensure
that we implement and maintain adequate controls over our
financial processes and reporting in the future. Even if we
conclude, and our independent registered public accounting firm
concurs, that our internal control over financial reporting
provides reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, because of its inherent limitations,
internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect fraud or misstatements. Failure to implement required new
or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their
implementation, could harm our operating results or cause us to
fail to meet our reporting obligations. If we or our independent
registered public accounting firm discover a material weakness,
the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could
reduce the market’s confidence in our financial statements
and harm our stock price. In addition, a delay in compliance
with Section 404 could subject us to a variety of
administrative sanctions, including ineligibility for short form
resale registration, SEC action, the suspension or delisting of
our common stock from The NASDAQ Global Market and the inability
of registered broker-dealers to make a market in our common
stock, which would further reduce our stock price and could harm
our business.
If we do not
adequately protect our intellectual property rights, our
competitive position may be adversely affected.
Our intellectual property is an essential element of our
business. We rely on a combination of copyright, trademark,
trade secret and other intellectual property laws and
restrictions on disclosure to protect our intellectual property
rights. To date, we have not sought patent protection.
Consequently, we will not be able to protect our technologies
from independent invention by third parties. Despite our efforts
to protect our intellectual property rights, unauthorized
parties may attempt to copy or otherwise to obtain and use our
technology and games. Monitoring unauthorized use of our games
is difficult and costly, and we cannot be certain that the steps
we have taken will prevent piracy and other unauthorized
distribution and use of our technology and games, particularly
internationally where the laws may not protect our intellectual
property rights as fully as in the United States. In the future,
we may have to resort to litigation to enforce our intellectual
property rights, which could result in substantial costs and
diversion of our management and resources.
In addition, although we require our third-party developers to
sign agreements not to disclose or improperly use our trade
secrets and acknowledging that all inventions, trade secrets,
works of authorship, developments and other processes generated
by them on our behalf are our property and to assign to us any
ownership they may have in those works, it may still be possible
for third parties to obtain and improperly use our intellectual
properties without our consent. This could harm our business,
operating results and financial condition.
Third parties may
sue us for intellectual property infringement, which, if
successful, may disrupt our business and could require us to pay
significant damage awards.
Third parties may sue us for intellectual property infringement
or initiate proceedings to invalidate our intellectual property,
either of which, if successful, could disrupt the conduct of our
business, cause us to pay significant damage awards or require
us to pay licensing fees. In the event of a successful claim
against us, we might be enjoined from using our or our licensed
intellectual property, we might incur significant licensing fees
and we might be forced to develop alternative technologies. Our
failure or inability to develop non-infringing technology or
games or to license the infringed or similar technology or games
on a timely basis could force us to withdraw games from the
market or prevent us from introducing new games. In addition,
even if we are able to license the infringed or similar
technology or games, license fees could be substantial and the
terms of these licenses could be burdensome, which might
adversely affect our operating results. We might also incur
substantial
expenses in defending against third-party infringement claims,
regardless of their merit. Successful infringement or licensing
claims against us might result in substantial monetary
liabilities and might materially disrupt the conduct of our
business.
Indemnity
provisions in various agreements potentially expose us to
substantial liability for intellectual property infringement,
damages caused by malicious software and other losses.
In the ordinary course of our business, most of our agreements
with carriers and other distributors include indemnification
provisions. In these provisions, we agree to indemnify them for
losses suffered or incurred in connection with our games,
including as a result of intellectual property infringement and
damages caused by viruses, worms and other malicious software.
The term of these indemnity provisions is generally perpetual
after execution of the corresponding license agreement, and the
maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required
to make under these indemnification provisions is generally
unlimited. Large future indemnity payments could harm our
business, operating results and financial condition.
As a result of
our business being concentrated with a limited number of
wireless carriers, we face a concentration of credit
risk.
As of December 31, 2005, our outstanding accounts
receivable balances with Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel,
Cingular Wireless and Vodafone were $1.7 million, $672,000,
$581,000 and $277,000, respectively. Similarly, as of
September 30, 2006, our outstanding accounts receivable
balances with those carriers were $2.5 million,
$1.2 million, $809,000 and $1.3 million,
respectively. Since a significant portion of our outstanding
accounts receivable are with Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel,
Cingular Wireless and Vodafone, we have a concentration of
credit risk. If any of these carriers is unable to fulfill its
payment obligations to us under our carrier agreements with
them, our revenues could decline significantly and our financial
condition might be harmed.
We may need to
raise additional capital to grow our business, and we may not be
able to raise capital on terms acceptable to us or at
all.
The operation of our business and our efforts to grow our
business further will require significant cash outlays and
commitments. If our cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments balances and any cash generated from operations and
from this offering are not sufficient to meet our cash
requirements, we will need to seek additional capital,
potentially through debt or equity financings, to fund our
growth. We may not be able to raise needed cash on terms
acceptable to us or at all. Financings, if available, may be on
terms that are dilutive or potentially dilutive to our
stockholders, and the prices at which new investors would be
willing to purchase our securities may be lower than the initial
public offering price. The holders of new securities may also
receive rights, preferences or privileges that are senior to
those of existing holders of our common stock. If new sources of
financing are required but are insufficient or unavailable, we
would be required to modify our growth and operating plans to
the extent of available funding, which would harm our ability to
grow our business.
We face risks
associated with currency exchange rate fluctuations.
Although we currently transact a majority of our business in
U.S. Dollars, we also transact substantial portions of our
business in pounds sterling and Euros as well as other
currencies. Conducting business in currencies other than
U.S. Dollars subjects us to fluctuations in currency
exchange rates that could have a negative impact on our reported
operating results. Fluctuations in the value of the
U.S. Dollar relative to other currencies impact our
revenues, cost of revenues and operating margins and result in
foreign currency translation gains and losses. To date, we have
not engaged in exchange rate hedging activities. Even were we to
implement hedging strategies to mitigate this risk, these
strategies might not eliminate our exposure to foreign exchange
rate fluctuations and would involve costs and risks of their
own, such as ongoing management time and expertise, external
costs to implement the strategies and potential accounting
implications.
Our operations in
countries with a history of corruption and transactions with
foreign governments, including government owned or controlled
wireless carriers, increase the risks associated with our
international activities.
As we operate and sell internationally, we are subject to the
U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, and other
laws that prohibit improper payments or offers of payments to
foreign governments and their officials and political parties by
U.S. and other business entities for the purpose of obtaining or
retaining business. We have operations, deal with carriers and
make sales in countries known to experience corruption, and
further international expansion may involve more of these
countries. Our activities in these countries create the risk of
unauthorized payments or offers of payments by one of our
employees, consultants, sales agents or distributors that could
be in violation of various laws including the FCPA, even though
these parties are not always subject to our control. We have
attempted to implement safeguards to discourage these practices
by our employees, consultants, sales agents and distributors.
However, our existing safeguards and any future improvements may
prove to be less than effective, and our employees, consultants,
sales agents or distributors may engage in conduct for which we
might be held responsible. Violations of the FCPA may result in
severe criminal or civil sanctions, and we may be subject to
other liabilities, which could negatively affect our business,
operating results and financial condition.
Changes to
financial accounting standards and new exchange rules could make
it more expensive to issue stock options to employees, which
would increase compensation costs and might cause us to change
our business practices.
We prepare our financial statements to conform with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. These
accounting principles are subject to interpretation by the
Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, the Securities
and Exchange Commission, or SEC, and various other bodies. A
change in those principles could have a significant effect on
our reported results and might affect our reporting of
transactions completed before a change is announced. For
example, we have used stock options as a fundamental component
of our employee compensation packages. We believe that stock
options directly motivate our employees to maximize long-term
stockholder value and, through the use of vesting, encourage
employees to remain in our employ. Several regulatory agencies
and entities have made regulatory changes that could make it
more difficult or expensive for us to grant stock options to
employees. For example, the FASB released Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 123R, Share-Based
Payment, that required us to record a charge to earnings for
employee stock option grants beginning in 2006. In addition,
regulations implemented by the NASDAQ Stock Market generally
require stockholder approval for all stock option plans, which
could make it more difficult for us to grant stock options to
employees. We may, as a result of these changes, incur increased
compensation costs, change our equity compensation strategy or
find it difficult to attract, retain and motivate employees, any
of which could materially and adversely affect our business,
operating results and financial condition.
Risks Relating to
Our Industry
Wireless
communications technology is changing rapidly, and we may not be
successful in working with these new technologies.
Wireless network and mobile handset technologies are undergoing
rapid innovation. New handsets with more advanced processors and
supporting advanced programming languages continue to be
introduced. In addition, networks that enable enhanced features,
such as multiplayer technology, are being developed and
deployed. We have no control over the demand for, or success of,
these products or technologies. The development of new,
technologically advanced games to match the advancements in
handset technology is a complex process requiring significant
research and development expense, as well as the accurate
anticipation of technological and market trends. If we fail to
anticipate and adapt to these and other technological changes,
the available channels for our games may be limited and our
market share and our operating results may suffer. Our future
success will
depend on our ability to adapt to rapidly changing technologies,
develop mobile games to accommodate evolving industry standards
and improve the performance and reliability of our games. In
addition, the widespread adoption of networking or
telecommunications technologies or other technological changes
could require substantial expenditures to modify or adapt our
games.
Technology changes in our industry require us to anticipate,
sometimes years in advance, which technologies we must implement
and take advantage of in order to make our games and other
mobile entertainment products competitive in the market.
Therefore, we usually start our product development with a range
of technical development goals that we hope to be able to
achieve. We may not be able to achieve these goals, or our
competition may be able to achieve them more quickly and
effectively than we can. In either case, our products may be
technologically inferior to those of our competitors, less
appealing to end users or both. If we cannot achieve our
technology goals within the original development schedule of our
products, then we may delay their release until these technology
goals can be achieved, which may delay or reduce our revenues,
increase our development expenses and harm our reputation.
Alternatively, we may increase the resources employed in
research and development in an attempt either to preserve our
product launch schedule or to keep up with our competition,
which would increase our development expenses. In either case,
our business, operating results and financial condition could be
materially harmed.
The complexity
and incompatibilities among mobile handsets may require us to
use additional resources for the development of our
games.
To reach large numbers of wireless subscribers, mobile
entertainment publishers like us must support numerous mobile
handsets and technologies. However, keeping pace with the rapid
innovation of handset technologies together with the continuous
introduction of new, and often incompatible, handset models by
wireless carriers requires us to make significant investments in
research and development, including personnel, technologies and
equipment. In the future, we may be required to make substantial
investments in our development if the number of different types
of handset models continues to proliferate. In addition, as more
advanced handsets are introduced enabling more complex, feature
rich games, we anticipate that our per-game development costs
will increase, which could increase the risks associated with
the failure of any one game and could materially harm our
operating results and financial condition.
If wireless
subscribers do not continue to use their mobile handsets to
access games and other applications, our business may be
adversely affected.
We operate in a developing industry. Our success depends on
growth in the number of wireless subscribers who use their
mobile handsets to access data services and, in particular,
entertainment applications of the type we develop and
distribute. New or different mobile entertainment applications,
such as streaming video or music applications, developed by our
current or future competitors may be preferred by subscribers to
our games. In addition, other mobile platforms such as the iPod
and dedicated portable gaming platforms such as the PlayStation
Portable and the Nintendo DS may become widespread, and end
users may choose to switch to these platforms. If the market for
our games does not continue to grow or we are unable to acquire
new end users, our business growth and future revenues could be
adversely affected. If end users switch their entertainment
spending away from the games and related applications that we
publish, or switch to portable gaming platforms or distribution
where we do not have comparative strengths, our business,
operating results and financial condition may suffer.
Our industry is
subject to risks generally associated with the entertainment
industry, any of which could significantly harm our operating
results.
Our business is subject to risks that are generally associated
with the entertainment industry, many of which are beyond our
control. These risks could negatively impact our operating
results and include: the popularity, price and timing of release
of games and mobile handsets on which they are
played; economic conditions that adversely affect discretionary
consumer spending; changes in consumer demographics; the
availability and popularity of other forms of entertainment; and
critical reviews and public tastes and preferences, which may
change rapidly and cannot necessarily be predicted.
A shift of
technology platform by wireless carriers and mobile handset
manufacturers could harm our business.
End users of games must have a mobile handset with multimedia
capabilities enabled by technologies capable of running
third-party games and related applications such as ours. Our
development resources are concentrated in the BREW and Java
platforms, and we have experience developing games for the
i-mode,
Mophun, Symbian and Windows Mobile Platforms. If one or more of
these technologies fall out of favor with handset manufacturers
and wireless carriers and there is a rapid shift to a technology
platform such as Adobe Flash Lite or a new technology where we
do not have development experience or resources, the development
period for our games may be lengthened, increasing our costs,
and the resulting games may be of lower quality, and may be
published later than anticipated. In such an event, our
reputation, business, operating results and financial condition
might suffer.
System or network
failures could reduce our sales, increase costs or result in a
loss of end users of our games.
Mobile game publishers rely on wireless carriers’ networks
to deliver games to end users and on their or other third
parties’ billing systems to track and account for the
downloading of their games. In certain circumstances, mobile
game publishers may also rely on their own servers to deliver
games on demand to end users through their carriers’
networks. In addition, certain subscription-based games such as
World Series of Poker and entertainment products such as
FOX Sports Mobile require access over the mobile Internet
to our servers in order to enable features such as multiplayer
modes, high score posting or access to information updates. Any
failure of, or technical problem with, carriers’, third
parties’ or our billing systems, delivery systems,
information systems or communications networks could result in
the inability of end users to download our games, prevent the
completion of billing for a game, or interfere with access to
some aspects of our games or other products. If any of these
systems fails or if there is an interruption in the supply of
power, an earthquake, fire, flood or other natural disaster, or
an act of war or terrorism, end users might be unable to access
our games. For example, from time to time, our carriers have
experienced failures with their billing and delivery systems and
communication networks, including gateway failures that reduced
the provisioning capacity of their branded
e-commerce
system. Any failure of, or technical problem with, the
carriers’, other third parties’ or our systems could
cause us to lose end users or revenues or incur substantial
repair costs and distract management from operating our
business. This, in turn, could harm our business, operating
results and financial condition.
The market for
mobile games is seasonal, and our results may vary significantly
from period to period.
Many new mobile handset models are released in the fourth
calendar quarter to coincide with the holiday shopping season.
Because many end users download our games soon after they
purchase new handsets, we may experience seasonal sales
increases based on the holiday selling period. However, due to
the time between handset purchases and game purchases, most of
this holiday impact occurs for us in our first quarter. In
addition, we seek to release many of our games in conjunction
with specific events, such as the release of a related movie. If
we miss these key selling periods for any reason, our sales will
suffer disproportionately. Likewise, if a key event to which our
game release schedule is tied were to be delayed or cancelled,
our sales would also suffer disproportionately. Further, for a
variety of reasons, including roaming charges for data downloads
that may make purchase of our games prohibitively expensive for
many end users while they are traveling,
we may experience seasonal sales decreases during the summer,
particularly in Europe. If the level of travel increases or
expands to other periods, our operating results and financial
condition may be harmed. Our ability to meet game development
schedules is affected by a number of factors, including the
creative processes involved, the coordination of large and
sometimes geographically dispersed development teams required by
the increasing complexity of our games, and the need to
fine-tune our games prior to their release. Any failure to meet
anticipated development or release schedules would likely result
in a delay of revenues or possibly a significant shortfall in
our revenues and cause our operating results to be materially
different than anticipated.
Our business
depends on the growth and maintenance of wireless communications
infrastructure.
Our success will depend on the continued growth and maintenance
of wireless communications infrastructure in the United States
and internationally. This includes deployment and maintenance of
reliable next-generation digital networks with the speed, data
capacity and security necessary to provide reliable wireless
communications services. Wireless communications infrastructure
may be unable to support the demands placed on it if the number
of subscribers continues to increase, or if existing or future
subscribers increase their bandwidth requirements. Wireless
communications have experienced a variety of outages and other
delays as a result of infrastructure and equipment failures, and
could face outages and delays in the future. These outages and
delays could reduce the level of wireless communications usage
as well as our ability to distribute our games successfully. In
addition, changes by a wireless carrier to network
infrastructure may interfere with downloads of our games and may
cause end users to lose functionality in our games that they
have already downloaded. This could harm our business, operating
results and financial condition.
Future mobile
handsets may significantly reduce or eliminate wireless
carriers’ control over delivery of our games and force us
to rely further on alternative sales channels, which, if not
successful, could require us to increase our sales and marketing
expenses significantly.
Substantially all our games are currently sold through
carriers’ branded
e-commerce
services. We have invested significant resources developing this
sales channel. However, a growing number of handset models
currently available allow wireless subscribers to browse the
Internet and, in some cases, download applications from sources
other than a carrier’s branded
e-commerce
service. In addition, the development of other application
delivery mechanisms such as premium-SMS may enable subscribers
to download applications without having to access a
carrier’s branded
e-commerce
service. Increased use by subscribers of open operating system
handsets or premium-SMS delivery systems will enable them to
bypass carriers’ branded
e-commerce
services and could reduce the market power of carriers. This
could force us to rely further on alternative sales channels
where we may not be successful selling our games, and could
require us to increase our sales and marketing expenses
significantly. As with our carriers, we believe that inferior
placement of our games and other mobile entertainment products
in the menus of off-deck distributors will result in lower
revenues than might otherwise be anticipated from these
alternative sales channels. We may be unable to develop and
promote our direct website distribution sufficiently to overcome
the limitations and disadvantages of off-deck distribution
channels. This could harm our business, operating results and
financial condition.
Actual or
perceived security vulnerabilities in mobile handsets or
wireless networks could adversely affect our revenues.
Maintaining the security of mobile handsets and wireless
networks is critical for our business. There are individuals and
groups who develop and deploy viruses, worms and other illicit
code or malicious software programs that may attack wireless
networks and handsets. Security experts have identified computer
“worm” programs, such as “Cabir” and
“Commwarrior.A,” and viruses, such as
“Lasco.A,” that target handsets running on the Symbian
operating system. Although these worms have
not been widely released and do not present an immediate risk to
our business, we believe future threats could lead some end
users to seek to return our games, reduce or delay future
purchases of our games or reduce or delay the use of their
handsets. Wireless carriers and handset manufacturers may also
increase their expenditures on protecting their wireless
networks and mobile phone products from attack, which could
delay adoption of new handset models. Any of these activities
could adversely affect our revenues and this could harm our
business, operating results and financial condition.
If a substantial
number of the end users that purchase our games by subscription
change mobile handsets or if wireless carriers switch to
subscription plans that require active monthly renewal by
subscribers, our sales could suffer.
Subscriptions represent a significant portion of our revenues.
As handset development continues, over time an increasing
percentage of end users who already own one or more of our
subscription games will likely upgrade from their existing
handsets. With some wireless carriers, it is not currently
feasible for these end users to transfer their existing
subscriptions from one handset to another. In addition, carriers
may switch their subscription billing systems to require end
users to actively renew, or opt-in, each month, rather than
current systems that passively renew requiring end users to take
some action to opt-out of their subscriptions. In either case,
unless we are able to re-sell subscriptions to these end users
or replace these end users with other end users, our sales would
suffer and this could harm our business, operating results and
financial condition.
Changes in
government regulation of the media and wireless communications
industries may adversely affect our business.
It is possible that a number of laws and regulations may be
adopted in the United States and elsewhere that could restrict
the media and wireless communications industries, including laws
and regulations regarding customer privacy, taxation, content
suitability, copyright, distribution and antitrust. Furthermore,
the growth and development of the market for electronic commerce
may prompt calls for more stringent consumer protection laws
that may impose additional burdens on companies such as ours
conducting business through wireless carriers. We anticipate
that regulation of our industry will increase and we will be
required to devote legal and other resources to address this
regulation. Changes in current laws or regulations or the
imposition of new laws and regulations in the United States or
elsewhere regarding the media and wireless communications
industries may lessen the growth of wireless communications
services and may materially reduce our ability to increase or
maintain sales of our games.
A number of studies have examined the health effects of mobile
phone use, and the results of some of the studies have been
interpreted as evidence that mobile phone use causes adverse
health effects. The establishment of a link between the use of
mobile phone services and health problems, or any media reports
suggesting such a link, could increase government regulation of,
and reduce demand for, mobile phones and, accordingly, the
demand for our games and related applications and this could
harm our business, operating results and financial condition.
Risks Related to
Ownership of Our Common Stock
There has been no
prior market for our common stock, our stock price may be
volatile or may decline regardless of our operating performance,
and you may not be able to resell your shares at or above the
initial public offering price.
There has been no public market for our common stock prior to
this offering. The initial public offering price for our common
stock will be determined through negotiations between the
underwriters and us. This initial public offering price may vary
from the market price of our common stock following this
offering. If you purchase shares of our common stock in this
offering, you may not be able to resell those shares at or above
the initial public offering price. An active or liquid market in
our
common stock may not develop upon completion of this offering
or, if it does develop, it may not be sustainable. The market
price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly in
response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our
control, including:
•
price and volume fluctuations in the overall stock market;
•
changes in operating performance and stock market valuations of
other technology companies generally, or those in our industry
in particular;
•
actual or anticipated fluctuations in our operating results;
•
the financial projections we may provide to the public, any
changes in these projections or our failure to meet these
projections;
•
changes in financial estimates by any securities analysts who
follow our company, our failure to meet these estimates or
failure of those analysts to initiate or maintain coverage of
our stock;
•
ratings downgrades by any securities analysts who follow our
company;
•
announcements by us or our competitors of significant technical
innovations, acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint
ventures or capital commitments;
•
the public’s response to our press releases or other public
announcements, including our filings with the SEC;
•
market conditions or trends in our industry or the economy as a
whole;
•
the loss of key personnel;
•
lawsuits threatened or filed against us;
•
future sales of our common stock by our executive officers,
directors and significant stockholders; and
•
other events or factors, including those resulting from war,
incidents of terrorism or responses to these events.
In addition, the stock markets, and in particular The NASDAQ
Global Market on which our common stock will be listed, have
experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have
affected and continue to affect the market prices of equity
securities of many technology companies. Stock prices of many
technology companies have fluctuated in a manner unrelated or
disproportionate to the operating performance of those
companies. In the past, stockholders have instituted securities
class action litigation following periods of market volatility.
If we were to become involved in securities litigation, it could
have substantial costs and divert resources and the attention of
management from our business and adversely affect our business,
operating results and financial condition.
Maintaining and
improving our financial controls and the requirements of being a
public company may strain our resources, divert
management’s attention and affect our ability to attract
and retain qualified members for our board of
directors.
As a public company, we will be subject to the reporting
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the
Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of the NASDAQ
Stock Market. The requirements of these rules and regulations
will increase our legal, accounting and financial compliance
costs, will make some activities more difficult, time-consuming
and costly and may also place undue strain on our personnel,
systems and resources.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we
maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and
internal control over financial reporting. This can be difficult
to do. For example, we depend on the reports of wireless
carriers for information regarding the amount of sales
of our games and related applications and to determine the
amount of royalties we owe branded content licensors and the
amount of our revenues. These reports may not be timely, and in
the past they have contained, and in the future they may
contain, errors.
In order to maintain and improve the effectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over
financial reporting, we will need to expend significant
resources and provide significant management oversight. We have
a substantial effort ahead of us to implement appropriate
processes, document the system of internal control over relevant
processes, assess their design, remediate any deficiencies
identified and test their operation. As a result,
management’s attention may be diverted from other business
concerns, which could harm our business, operating results and
financial condition. These efforts will also involve substantial
accounting-related costs. In addition, if we are unable to
continue to meet these requirements, we may not be able to
remain listed on The NASDAQ Global Market.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of the
NASDAQ Stock Market will make it more difficult and more
expensive for us to maintain directors’ and officers’
liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced
coverage or incur substantially higher costs to maintain
coverage. If we are unable to maintain adequate directors’
and officers’ insurance, our ability to recruit and retain
qualified directors, especially those directors who may be
considered independent for purposes of the NASDAQ Stock Market
rules, and officers will be significantly curtailed.
Purchasers in
this offering will suffer immediate substantial
dilution.
If you purchase shares of our common stock in this offering, the
book value of your shares will immediately be less than the
price you paid. This effect is known as dilution. If previously
granted options or warrants are exercised, additional dilution
will occur. As of September 30, 2006, options to purchase
8,158,311 shares of our common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of approximately $1.45 per share were
outstanding. Subsequent to September 30, 2006, we granted
additional options to purchase an aggregate of
855,925 shares of our common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of $3.51 per share. In addition, as of the
date of this prospectus, warrants to purchase an aggregate of
687,223 shares of our common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of $1.74 were outstanding. Exercise of these
options and warrants will result in additional dilution to
purchasers of our common stock in this offering.
A significant
portion of our total outstanding shares may be sold into the
market in the near future. If there are substantial sales of
shares of our common stock, the price of our common stock could
decline.
The price of our common stock could decline if there are
substantial sales of our common stock or if there is a large
number of shares of our common stock available for sale. After
this offering, we will have
outstanding
shares of our common stock based on the number of shares
outstanding as of September 30, 2006. This includes the
shares that we are selling in this offering, which may be resold
in the public market immediately. The remaining
63,169,489 shares, or % of our
outstanding shares after this offering, are currently restricted
as a result of market standoff
and/or
lock-up
agreements but will be able to be sold in the near future as set
forth below.
Number of Shares
and
Date Available
for Sale
% of Total
Outstanding
into Public
Market
61,532,158 shares, or
%
180 days after the date of
this prospectus, sales of 48,582,262 of which will be subject to
volume and other limitations.
1,637,331 shares, or
%
More than 180 days after the
date of this prospectus, as restricted stock vests and shares
are released from escrow
After this offering, the holders of an aggregate of
47,571,918 shares of our common stock or subject to
warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2006 will have
rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file
registration statements covering their shares or to include
their shares in registration statements that we may file for
ourselves or our stockholders. We also intend to register all
shares of our common stock that we have issued and may issue
under our employee equity incentive plans. Once we register
these shares, they will be able to be sold freely in the public
market upon issuance, subject to existing market standoff
and/or
lock-up
agreements.
The market price of the shares of our common stock could decline
as a result of sales of a substantial number of our shares in
the public market or the perception in the market that the
holders of a large number of shares intend to sell their shares.
Our directors,
executive officers and principal stockholders will continue to
have substantial control over us after this offering and could
delay or prevent a change in corporate control.
After this offering, our directors, executive officers and
holders of more than 5% of our common stock, together with their
affiliates, will beneficially own, in the aggregate,
approximately % of our outstanding
common stock. As a result, these stockholders, acting together,
would have the ability to significantly influence the outcome of
matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including
the election of directors and any merger, consolidation or sale
of all or substantially all of our assets. In addition, these
stockholders, acting together, would have the ability to
significantly influence the management and affairs of our
company. Accordingly, this concentration of ownership might harm
the market price of our common stock by:
•
delaying, deferring or preventing a change in our control;
•
impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business
combination involving us; or
•
discouraging a potential acquirer from making a tender offer or
otherwise attempting to obtain control of us.
We have broad
discretion in the use of the net proceeds from this offering and
may not use them effectively.
We cannot specify with any certainty the particular uses of the
net proceeds that we will receive from this offering other than
the use of $12.1 million to repay in full the principal and
accrued interest on our outstanding loan from Pinnacle Ventures.
Our management will have broad discretion in the application of
the net proceeds, including working capital, possible
acquisitions and other general corporate purposes. Our
stockholders may not agree with the manner in which our
management chooses to allocate and spend the net proceeds. The
failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could
harm our business and financial condition. Pending their use, we
may invest the net proceeds from this offering in a manner that
does not produce income or that loses value.
If securities or
industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate
or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and
trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on
the research and reports that securities or industry analysts
publish about us or our business. We do not currently have and
may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry
analysts. If no securities or industry analysts commence
coverage of our company, the trading price for our stock would
be negatively impacted. In the event we obtain securities or
industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who
cover us downgrade our stock or publish inaccurate or
unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would
likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage
of our company or fail to publish reports on us regularly,
demand for our stock could decrease, which might cause our stock
price and trading volume to decline.
Some provisions
in our restated certificate of incorporation, restated bylaws,
Delaware law and the terms of some of our licensing and
distribution agreements may deter third parties from acquiring
us.
The terms of a number of our agreements with branded content
owners and wireless carriers effectively provide that, if we
undergo a change of control, the applicable content owner or
carrier will be entitled to terminate the relevant agreement. In
addition, we anticipate that our restated certificate of
incorporation and restated bylaws that will become effective
immediately following the completion of this offering will
contain provisions that may make the acquisition of our company
more difficult without the approval of our board of directors,
including the following:
•
our board of directors is classified into three classes of
directors with staggered three-year terms;
•
only our lead independent director, our chief executive officer,
our president or a majority of our board of directors is
authorized to call a special meeting of stockholders;
•
our stockholders may take action only at a meeting of
stockholders and not by written consent;
•
vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by our
board of directors and not by stockholders;
•
our restated certificate of incorporation authorizes
undesignated preferred stock, the terms of which may be
established and shares of which may be issued without
stockholder approval; and
•
advance notice procedures apply for stockholders to nominate
candidates for election as directors or to bring matters before
an annual meeting of stockholders.
These provisions and other provisions in our charter documents
could discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a
change in our control. Any delay or prevention of a change of
control transaction could cause stockholders to lose a
substantial premium over the then-current market price of their
shares. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests
and could make it more difficult for you and other stockholders
to elect directors of your choosing or to cause us to take other
corporate actions you desire.
In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware
General Corporation Law, which, subject to some exceptions,
prohibits “business combinations” between a Delaware
corporation and an “interested stockholder,” which is
generally defined as a stockholder who becomes a beneficial
owner of 15% or more of a Delaware corporation’s voting
stock, for a three-year period following the date that the
stockholder became an interested stockholder. Section 203
could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a
change in control that our stockholders might consider to be in
their best interests.
In addition to historical information, this prospectus contains
forward-looking statements. We may, in some cases, use words,
such as “project,”“believe,”“anticipate,”“plan,”“expect,”“estimate,”“intend,”“continue,”“should,”“would,”“could,”“potentially,”“will” or “may,” or
other similar words and expressions that convey uncertainty
about future events or outcomes to identify these
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this
prospectus include statements about:
•
our expectations regarding our revenues, expenses and operations
and our ability to achieve and then sustain profitability;
•
our anticipated cash needs and our estimates regarding our
capital requirements;
•
our ability to expand our base of end users and relationships
with wireless carriers and branded content owners;
•
our ability to expand our product offerings and our ability to
develop games for other platforms;
•
our anticipated growth strategies and sources of new revenues;
•
anticipated trends and challenges in our business and the
markets in which we operate;
•
our ability to retain and hire necessary employees and staff our
operations appropriately;
•
the impact of seasonality on our business;
•
the amount of external development resources that we intend to
use;
•
our expectations regarding the royalty rates for intellectual
property that we license and publishing of original games;
•
our ability to estimate accurately for purposes of preparing our
consolidated financial statements;
•
our ability to find future acquisition opportunities on
favorable terms or at all;
•
our intention to license additional brands and other
intellectual property;
•
our planned capital expenditures;
•
our international expansion plans and our anticipated
international revenue growth;
•
our ability to stay abreast of modified or new laws applying to
our business; and
•
our spending of the net proceeds from this offering.
The outcome of the events described in these forward-looking
statements is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties
and other factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially from the results anticipated by these forward-looking
statements. These risks, uncertainties and factors include those
we discuss in this prospectus under the caption “Risk
Factors.” You should read these risk factors and the other
cautionary statements made in this prospectus as being
applicable to all related forward-looking statements wherever
they appear in this prospectus.
The forward-looking statements made in this prospectus relate
only to events as of the date on which the statements are made.
We undertake no obligation to update publicly any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise, except as required by
law.
This prospectus also contains statistical data that we obtained
from industry publications and reports. These industry
publications generally indicate that they have obtained their
information from sources believed to be reliable, but do not
guarantee the accuracy and completeness of their information.
Although we have not independently verified the data contained
in these industry publications and reports, based on our
industry experience we believe that the publications are
reliable and the conclusions contained in the publications and
reports are reasonable.
We estimate that we will receive net proceeds from the sale of
the shares
of common stock that we are selling in this offering of
approximately $ million,
based on an assumed initial public offering price of
$ per share, after deducting the
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses. Each $1.00 increase or decrease in the
assumed initial public offering price would increase or
decrease, as applicable, the net proceeds to us by approximately
$ million, assuming the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions. If the
underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares in this
offering is exercised in full, we estimate that our net proceeds
will be approximately
$ million.
The principal purposes of this offering are to obtain additional
capital, to create a public market for our common stock and to
facilitate our future access to the public equity markets. We
intend to use approximately $12.1 million of the net
proceeds of this offering to repay in full the principal and
accrued interest on our outstanding loan from Pinnacle Ventures,
based on amounts accrued as of December 19, 2006. The loan
has an interest rate of 11% and has a maturity date of June
2009. We used the net proceeds of this loan for working capital
and general corporate purposes. We expect to use the remaining
net proceeds of this offering for general corporate purposes,
including working capital and potential capital expenditures. We
do not have more specific plans for the net proceeds from this
offering. We may also use a portion of the net proceeds for the
acquisition of, or investment in, companies, technologies,
products or assets that complement our business. However, we
have no present understandings, commitments or agreements to
enter into any acquisitions or make any investments.
We have not yet determined our anticipated expenditures and
therefore cannot estimate the amounts to be used for each of the
purposes discussed above. The amounts and timing of any
expenditures will vary depending on the amount of cash generated
by our operations, competitive and technological developments
and the rate of growth, if any, of our business. Accordingly,
our management will have significant flexibility in applying the
net proceeds from this offering, and investors will be relying
on the judgment of our management regarding the application of
these net proceeds. Pending the uses described above, we intend
to invest the net proceeds from this offering in short-term,
interest-bearing, investment-grade securities. The goal with
respect to the investment of these net proceeds will be capital
preservation and liquidity so that these funds are readily
available to fund our operations.
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital
stock, and we do not currently intend to pay any cash dividends
on our common stock for the foreseeable future. We expect to
retain future earnings, if any, to fund the development and
growth of our business. Any future determination to pay
dividends on our common stock will be at the discretion of our
board of directors and will depend upon, among other factors,
our financial condition, operating results, current and
anticipated cash needs, plans for expansion and other factors
that our board of directors may deem relevant. Our existing loan
agreement with Pinnacle Ventures prohibits payment of dividends
prior to the effective date of the registration statement
covering this offering.
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
September 30, 2006:
•
on an actual basis;
•
on a pro forma basis to reflect (i) the automatic
conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into
47,040,945 shares of our common stock, as if this had
occurred as of September 30, 2006, and (ii) the
reclassification of our preferred stock warrant liability to
additional paid-in capital upon the conversion of warrants to
purchase shares of our convertible preferred stock into warrants
to purchase shares of our common stock upon the completion of
this offering; and
•
on a pro forma as adjusted basis to reflect, in addition,
(i) the sale by us of
the shares
of common stock offered by us in this offering at an assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per share, after deducting
the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses, (ii) the amendment and
restatement of our certificate of incorporation immediately
following the completion of this offering and (iii) the use
of approximately $12.1 million of the net proceeds of this
offering to repay in full the principal and accrued interest on
our loan from Pinnacle Ventures.
You should read this table together with our consolidated
financial statements and related notes and
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in
this prospectus.
Mandatorily redeemable convertible
preferred stock (Series A –
D-1),
$0.0001 par value per share; 37,639,842 shares
authorized, 36,773,066 shares issued and outstanding,
actual; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding, pro forma
or pro forma as adjusted
57,246
—
—
Special junior redeemable preferred
stock, $0.0001 par value; 13,454,516 shares authorized,
10,267,879 shares issued and outstanding, actual; no
shares authorized, issued or outstanding, pro forma or pro forma
as adjusted
19,098
—
—
Stockholders’ equity (deficit):
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par
value per share; no shares authorized, issued or outstanding,
actual or pro forma; 5,000,000 shares authorized, no shares
issued or outstanding, pro forma as adjusted
—
—
—
Common stock, $0.0001 par
value per share; 100,000,000 shares authorized,
16,128,544 shares issued and outstanding, actual;
100,000,000 shares authorized, 63,169,489 shares
issued and outstanding, pro forma; 250,000,000 shares
authorized, shares
issued and outstanding, pro forma as adjusted
2
6
Additional paid-in capital
19,234
97,608
Deferred stock-based compensation
(562
)
(562
)
(562
)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
229
229
229
Accumulated deficit
(43,666
)
(43,666
)
(43,666
)
Total stockholders’ equity
(deficit)
(24,763
)
53,615
Total capitalization
$
61,946
$
61,946
$
(1)
Each $1.00 increase or decrease in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase or decrease, respectively, the amount of
additional paid-in capital, total stockholders’ equity
(deficit) and total capitalization by approximately
$ million, assuming the
number of
shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the estimated
underwriting discounts and commissions.
In the table above, the number of shares outstanding as of
September 30, 2006 does not include:
•
8,158,311 shares issuable upon the exercise of stock
options outstanding as of September 30, 2006 with a
weighted average exercise price of approximately $1.45 per
share;
•
687,223 shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants
outstanding as of September 30, 2006 with a weighted
average exercise price of approximately $1.74 per
share; and
•
shares
to be reserved for issuance under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan
and our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, each of which will
become effective on the first day that our common stock is
publicly traded and contains provisions that automatically
increase its share reserve each year, as more fully described in
“Management — Employee Benefit Plans.”
If you invest in our common stock in this offering, your
interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between
the initial public offering price of our common stock and the
pro forma net tangible book value of our common stock after this
offering. As of September 30, 2006, our pro forma net
tangible book value was approximately $10.7 million, or
$0.17 per share, based upon 63,169,489 shares outstanding
as of this date. Pro forma net tangible book value per share
represents the amount of our total tangible assets less our
total liabilities, divided by the number of outstanding shares
of our common stock, after giving effect to the automatic
conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into
shares of our common stock and the reclassification of our
preferred stock warrant liability to additional paid-in capital
upon the conversion of warrants to purchase shares of our
convertible preferred stock into warrants to purchase shares of
our common stock upon the completion of this offering.
After giving effect to the sale by us of
the shares
of common stock offered by us in this offering at an assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per share, after deducting
the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and the
estimated offering expenses, our pro forma as adjusted net
tangible book value as of September 30, 2006 would have
been approximately $ million,
or $ per share. This
represents an immediate increase in pro forma net tangible book
value of $ per share to
existing stockholders and an immediate dilution of
$ per share to new investors
purchasing shares at the initial public offering price. The
following table illustrates this per share dilution:
Increase in pro forma net tangible
book value per share attributable to new investors
Pro forma as adjusted net tangible
book value per share after this offering
Dilution in pro forma net tangible
book value per share to new investors
$
A $1.00 increase or decrease in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ would increase
or decrease our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value
per share after this offering by
$ per share and the dilution
in pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value to new
investors by $ per share,
assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the
cover page of this prospectus, remains the same and after
deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions.
If the underwriters exercise in full their option to purchase
additional shares of our common stock in this offering, the pro
forma net tangible book value per share after giving effect to
this offering would be $ per
share, and the dilution in pro forma net tangible book value per
share to investors in this offering would be
$ per share.
The following table summarizes on the pro forma as adjusted
basis described above, the difference between our existing
stockholders and the purchasers of shares of our common stock in
this offering with respect to the number of shares of common
stock purchased from us, the total consideration paid to us and
the average price paid per share paid to us, based on an assumed
initial public offering price of
$ per share, before deducting
the estimated underwriting discounts and commissions:
A $1.00 increase or decrease in the assumed initial public
offering price of $ per share
would increase or decrease, respectively, total consideration
paid by new investors and total consideration paid by all
stockholders by approximately
$ million, assuming that the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same.
The above discussion and tables assume no exercise of our stock
options or warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2006,
consisting of 8,158,311 shares of our common stock issuable
upon the exercise of stock options with a weighted average
exercise price of approximately $1.45 per share and
687,223 shares of our common stock issuable upon the
exercise of warrants with a weighted average exercise price of
approximately $1.74 per share. If all of these options and
warrants were exercised, then:
•
there will be an additional
$ per share of dilution to
new investors;
•
our existing stockholders, including the holders of these
options and warrants, would own % and our new
investors would own % of the total number of shares
of our common stock outstanding upon the completion of this
offering; and
•
our existing stockholders, including the holders of these
options and warrants, would have paid % of total
consideration, at an average price per share of
$ , and our new investors would
have paid % of total consideration.
You should read the selected consolidated financial data below
in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”
and the consolidated financial statements, related notes and
other financial information included elsewhere in this
prospectus. The selected consolidated financial data in this
section are not intended to replace the financial statements and
are qualified in their entirety by the financial statements and
related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.
The following table presents selected historical financial data.
We derived the statements of operations data for the years ended
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and the balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2004 and 2005 and September 30, 2006 from
our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere
in this prospectus. We derived the statements of operations data
for the period from May 16, 2001 (inception) through
December 31, 2001 and the year ended December 31, 2002
and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2001, 2002
and 2003 from our audited consolidated financial statements that
do not appear in this prospectus. We derived the statement of
operations data for the nine months ended September 30,2005 from our unaudited consolidated financial statements
included elsewhere in this prospectus. We have prepared the
unaudited consolidated financial statements on the same basis as
the audited consolidated financial statements and have included,
in our opinion, all adjustments, consisting only of normal
recurring adjustments, that we consider necessary to state
fairly the results of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2005. Our historical results are not
necessarily indicative of the results we expect in the future,
and our results for the nine months ended September 30,2006 should not be considered indicative of results we expect
for the full fiscal year.
The pro forma per share data give effect to the conversion of
all our outstanding convertible preferred stock into common
stock upon the completion of this offering and adjustments to
eliminate accretion to preferred stock and the charges
associated with the cumulative effect change and subsequent
remeasurement to fair value of our preferred stock warrants. For
further information concerning the calculation of pro forma per
share information, please refer to note 2 of our notes to
consolidated financial statements.
You should read the following discussion and analysis in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and
related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. This
discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve
risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may
differ materially from those anticipated in these
forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors,
including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and
elsewhere in this prospectus.
Overview
Glu Mobile is a leading global publisher of mobile games. We
have developed and published a portfolio of more than 100 casual
and traditional games to appeal to a broad cross section of the
over one billion subscribers served by our more than 150
wireless carriers and other distributors. We create games and
related applications based on third-party licensed brands and
other intellectual property, as well as on our own original
brands and intellectual property. Our games based on licensed
intellectual property include Deer Hunter, Diner
Dash, Monopoly, Sonic the Hedgehog, World
Series of Poker and Zuma. Our original games based on
our own intellectual property include Alpha Wing,
Ancient Empires, Blackjack Hustler, Stranded
and Super K.O. Boxing.
We seek to attract end users by developing engaging content that
is designed specifically to take advantage of the portability
and networked nature of mobile handsets. We leverage the
marketing resources and distribution infrastructure of wireless
carriers and the brands and other intellectual property of
third-party content owners, which allows us to focus our efforts
on developing and publishing high-quality mobile games.
We believe the increase in quality and greater availability of
mobile games are increasing end-user awareness of and demand for
mobile games. At the same time, carriers and branded content
owners are focusing on a small group of publishers that have the
ability to produce high-quality mobile games consistently and
port them rapidly and cost effectively to a wide variety of
handsets. Additionally, branded content owners are seeking
publishers that have the ability to distribute games globally
through relationships with most or all of the major carriers. We
believe we have created the requisite development and porting
technology and have achieved the requisite scale to be in this
group. We also believe that leveraging our carrier and content
owner relationships will allow us to grow our revenues without
corresponding percentage growth in our infrastructure and
operating costs.
Our revenue growth rate will depend significantly on continued
growth in the mobile game market and our ability to continue to
attract new end users in that market. Our ability to attain
profitability will be affected by the extent to which we must
incur additional expenses to expand our sales, marketing,
development, and general and administrative capabilities to grow
our business. The largest component of our expenses is personnel
costs. Personnel costs consist of salaries, benefits and
incentive compensation, including bonuses and stock-based
compensation, for our employees. Our operating expenses will
continue to grow in absolute dollars, assuming our revenues
continue to grow. As a percentage of revenues, we expect these
expenses to decrease.
We were incorporated in May 2001 and introduced our first mobile
games to the market in July 2002. In December 2004 and in March
2006, we acquired Macrospace and iFone, respectively, each a
mobile game developer and publisher based in the United Kingdom.
In the third quarter of 2005, we opened a Hong Kong office; in
the third quarter of 2006, we opened an office in France; and,
in the fourth quarter of 2006, we opened additional offices in
Brazil and Germany.
Revenues
We generate the vast majority of our revenues from wireless
carriers that market and distribute our games. These carriers
generally charge a one-time purchase fee or a monthly
subscription fee on their subscribers’ phone bills when the
subscribers download our games to their mobile phones. The
carriers perform the billing and collection functions and
generally remit to us a contractual fee or a contractual
percentage of their collected fee for each game. We recognize as
revenues the percentage of the fees due to us from the carrier
(see “— Critical Accounting Policies and
Estimates — Revenue Recognition” below). End
users may also initiate the purchase of our games through
various Internet portal sites or through other delivery
mechanisms, with carriers generally continuing to be responsible
for billing, collecting and remitting to us a portion of their
fees. To date, eliminating the impact of our acquisitions, our
domestic revenues have grown more rapidly than our international
revenues, and this trend may continue.
Cost of
Revenues
Our cost of revenues consists primarily of royalties that we pay
to content owners from which we license brands and other
intellectual property and, to a limited extent, to certain
external developers. Our cost of revenues also includes noncash
expenses — amortization of certain acquired intangible
assets, and any impairment of those intangible assets, and any
impairment of prepaid royalties and guarantees. We record
advance royalty payments made to content licensors as prepaid
royalties on our balance sheet when payment is made to the
licensor. We recognize royalties in cost of revenues based upon
the revenues derived from the relevant game multiplied by the
applicable royalty rate. If our licensors earn royalties in
excess of their advance royalties, we also recognize these
excess royalties as cost of revenues in the period they are
earned by the licensor. If applicable, we will record an
impairment of prepaid royalties or accrue for future guaranteed
royalties that are in excess of anticipated demand or net
realizable value. At each balance sheet date, we perform a
detailed review of prepaid royalties and guarantees that
considers multiple factors, including demand forecast, game life
cycle status, game development plans and current and anticipated
sales levels.
We pay some of our external developers, especially in Europe,
royalties in addition to payments for game development costs. We
recognize these royalties as cost of revenues in the period the
developer earns the royalties based on the revenues from the
relevant game multiplied by the applicable royalty rate. We
expense the costs for development of our games prior to
technological feasibility as we incur them throughout the
development process, and we include these costs in research and
development expenses (see “— Critical Accounting
Policies and Estimates — Software Development
Costs”). To date, royalties paid to developers have not
been significant, but we expect them to increase in aggregate
amount based on our existing contracts with developers.
Absent further impairments of existing intangible assets, we
expect amortization of intangible assets included in cost of
revenues to be $552,000 in the fourth quarter of 2006,
$2.1 million in 2007, $883,000 in 2008, $526,000 in 2009,
$354,000 in 2010 and $84,000 in 2011. These amounts would likely
increase if we make future acquisitions.
Gross
Margin
Our gross margin is determined principally by the mix of games
that we license. Our games based on licensed intellectual
property require us to pay royalties to the licensor and the
royalty rates in our licenses vary significantly; our original
Glu-branded games, which are based on our own intellectual
property, require no royalty payments to licensors. There are
multiple internal and external factors that affect the mix of
revenues from licensed games and Glu-branded games, including
the overall number of licensed games and Glu-branded games
available for sale during a particular period, the extent of our
and our carriers’ marketing efforts for each game, and the
deck placement of each game on our carriers’ mobile
handsets. We believe the success of any individual game during a
particular period is affected by its quality and third-party
ratings, its marketing and media exposure, its consumer
recognizability, its overall acceptance by end users and the
availability of competitive games. If our product mix shifts
more to licensed games or games with higher royalty rates, our
gross margin would decline. Our gross margin is also adversely
affected by ongoing amortization of acquired intangible assets,
such as licensed content, games, trademarks and carrier
contracts, that are directly related to revenue generating
activities and by periodic charges for impairment of these
assets and of
prepaid royalties and guarantees. These charges can cause gross
margin variations, particularly from quarter to quarter.
Operating
Expenses
Our operating expenses primarily include research and
development expenses, sales and marketing expenses and general
and administrative expenses.
Research and Development. Our research and
development expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits
of employees working on creating, developing, porting, quality
assurance, carrier certification and deployment of our games, on
technologies related to interoperating with our various wireless
carriers and on our internal platforms, payments to third
parties for developing and porting of our games, and allocated
facilities costs.
We devote substantial resources to the development, porting and
quality assurance of our games and expect this to continue in
the future. We believe that developing games internally through
our own development studios allows us to increase operating
margins, leverage the technology we have developed and better
control game delivery. During 2006, as a result of our
acquisition of iFone, we substantially increased our use of
external development resources, but we currently do not expect
further significant increases in expenses for external
development. Our games generally require six months to one year
to produce, based on the complexity and feature set of the game
developed, the number of carrier wireless platforms and mobile
handsets covered, and the experience of the internal or external
developer. We expect our research and development expenses will
increase in absolute terms as we continue to create new games
and technologies, but that these expenses will continue to
decline as a percentage of revenues.
Sales and Marketing. Our sales and marketing
expenses relate primarily to salaries, benefits and incentive
compensation for sales and marketing personnel, expenses for
advertising, trade shows, public relations and other promotional
and marketing activities, expenses for general business
development activities, travel and entertainment expenses and
allocated facilities costs. We expect sales and marketing
expenses to increase in absolute terms with the growth of our
business and as we further promote our games and the Glu brand.
Although we expect our variable marketing expenses to increase
at least as rapidly as our revenues, we expect that our sales
and marketing headcount will not increase as rapidly as revenues
and that therefore sales and marketing expenses will continue to
decrease as a percentage of revenues.
General and Administrative. Our general and
administrative expenses relate primarily to salaries and
benefits for general and administrative personnel, consulting
fees, legal, accounting and other professional fees, information
technology costs and allocated facilities costs. We expect that
general and administrative expenses will increase in absolute
terms as we hire additional personnel and incur costs related to
the anticipated growth of our business and our operation as a
public company. We also expect that these expenses will increase
because of the additional costs to comply with the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related regulation, our efforts to expand
our international operations and, in the near term, additional
accounting costs related to the public offering of our common
stock. However, we expect these expenses to continue to decrease
as a percentage of revenues.
Based on our current revenue and expense projections, we expect
that our various operating expense categories will decline as a
percentage of revenues. We could fail to increase our revenues
as anticipated, and we could decide to increase expenses in one
or more categories to respond to competitive pressures or for
other reasons. In these cases and others, it is possible that
one or more of our operating expense categories would not
decline as a percentage of revenues.
Amortization of Intangible Assets. We record
amortization of acquired intangible assets that are directly
related to revenue generating activities as part of our cost of
revenues and amortization of the remaining acquired intangible
assets, such as noncompetition agreements, as part of our
operating expenses. We record intangible assets on our balance
sheet based upon their fair value at the time
they are acquired. We determine the fair value of the intangible
assets using a discounted cash flows approach. We amortize the
amortizable intangible assets using the straight-line method
over their estimated useful lives of two to six years. Absent
impairments of existing intangible assets, we expect
amortization of existing intangible assets to be $140,000 in the
fourth quarter of 2006, $266,000 in 2007, $267,000 in 2008,
$267,000 in 2009 and $256,000 in 2010. These amounts would
likely increase if we make future acquisitions.
Restructuring Charge. In 2005, we undertook
restructuring activities to reduce our ongoing operating
expenses. This restructuring principally consisted of costs
associated with employee termination benefits. We recorded these
costs as an operating expense when we communicated the benefit
arrangement to the employee and no significant future services
were required of the employee in order to earn the termination
benefits other than a minimum retention period.
Acquired In-Process Research and
Development. We classify all development projects
acquired in business combinations as acquired in-process
research and development, or IPR&D, if the feasibility of
the acquired technology has not been established and no future
alternative uses exist. We expense the fair value of IPR&D
at the time it is acquired. We determine the fair value of the
IPR&D using a discounted cash flows approach. In estimating
the appropriate discount rate, we consider, among other things,
the risks to developing technology given changes in trends and
technology in our industry.
Interest and
Other Income, Net
Interest and other income, net, includes interest income,
interest expense, accretion of the fair value of warrants issued
to Pinnacle Ventures in conjunction with its loan to us, changes
in our preferred stock warrant liability and foreign currency
gains and losses. Following the completion of this offering when
our outstanding warrants to purchase redeemable convertible
preferred stock convert into warrants to purchase common stock,
we will no longer be required to record changes in our preferred
stock warrant liability under FSP
150-5 or
accretion in the fair value of the Pinnacle Ventures warrants.
Following this offering, we will have additional cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments of approximately
$
resulting from the net proceeds of this offering. This will
likely cause a substantial increase in our interest income.
Accounting for
Income Taxes
We are subject to tax in the United States as well as other tax
jurisdictions or countries in which we conduct business.
Earnings from our
non-U.S.
activities are subject to local country income tax and may be
subject to current United States income tax depending on whether
these earnings are subject to U.S. income tax based upon
U.S. anti-deferral rules, such as Subpart F of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986. In addition, some revenues
generated outside of the United States and the United Kingdom
may be subject to withholding taxes. In some cases, these
withholding taxes may be deductible on a current basis or may be
available as a credit to offset future income taxes depending on
a variety of factors.
We record a valuation allowance to reduce any deferred tax asset
to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. We
consider historical levels of income, expectations and risks
associated with estimates of future taxable income and ongoing
prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in assessing the
need for a valuation allowance. If we were to determine that we
would be able to realize deferred tax assets in the future in
excess of the net recorded amount, we would record an adjustment
to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance. Such an
adjustment would increase our income in the period the
determination is made. Historically, we have incurred operating
losses and have generated significant net operating loss
carryforwards.
As of December 31, 2005, the federal research and
development credit expired. Therefore, the 2006 tax calculations
only reflect the California research and development credit.
There is pending
legislation to reinstate the federal credit retroactively to
January 1, 2006. If the legislation is enacted, we will
recognize an additional credit in the fourth quarter of 2006.
Beginning on January 1, 2007, we will be accounting for
uncertainty in income taxes in accordance with FASB
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes. As of September 30, 2006, we have not
determined what the cumulative impact of adopting this change in
accounting method will be.
Cumulative
Effect of Change in Accounting Principle
On June 29, 2005, the FASB issued Staff Position
No. 150-5,
Issuer’s Accounting under FASB Statement No. 150
for Freestanding Warrants and Other Similar Instruments on
Shares That Are Redeemable, or FSP
150-5. FSP
150-5
affirms that warrants of this type are subject to the
requirements in SFAS No. 150, regardless of the
redemption price or the timing of the redemption feature.
Therefore, under SFAS No. 150, the outstanding
freestanding warrants to purchase our convertible preferred
stock are liabilities that must be recorded at fair value each
quarter, with the changes in estimated fair value in the quarter
recorded as other expense or income.
We adopted FSP
150-5 as of
July 1, 2005 and recorded an expense of $315,000 for the
cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle to
reflect the estimated fair value of these warrants as of that
date. We recorded income of $85,000 and expense of
$1.1 million in other income (expense), net, for the
remainder of 2005 and the first nine months of 2006,
respectively, to reflect further increases or decreases in the
estimated fair value of the warrants. The pro forma effect of
the adoption of FSP
150-5 on our
results of operations for 2004 and 2005, if applied
retroactively as if SFAS No. 150 had been adopted in
those years, was not material. We estimated the fair value of
these warrants at the respective balance sheet dates using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model. This model utilizes as
inputs the estimated fair value of the underlying convertible
preferred stock at the valuation measurement date, the remaining
contractual term of the warrant, risk-free interest rates,
expected dividends and expected volatility of the price of the
underlying convertible preferred stock.
Our Series A, B, C, D and D-1 mandatorily redeemable
convertible preferred stock has a mandatory redemption
provision. In each quarterly and annual period, we accrete the
amount that is necessary to adjust the recorded balance of this
preferred stock to an amount equal to its estimated redemption
value at its redemption date using the effective interest
method. The redemption value is the greater of the par value of
the preferred stock plus any dividends declared and unpaid or
its estimated fair value using the effective interest method.
Each share of the outstanding preferred stock will automatically
convert to common stock if this offering is completed, results
in proceeds of at least $50 million and has an offering
price in excess of $4.50 per share, and we will cease
accreting upon this conversion.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance
with United States generally accepted accounting principles, or
GAAP. These accounting principles require us to make certain
estimates and judgments that can affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities as of the dates of the consolidated
financial statements, the disclosure of contingencies as of the
dates of the consolidated financial statements, and the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the periods presented.
Although we believe that our estimates and judgments are
reasonable under the
circumstances existing at the time these estimates and judgments
are made, actual results may differ from those estimates, which
could affect our consolidated financial statements.
We believe the following to be critical accounting policies
because they are important to the portrayal of our financial
condition or results of operations and they require critical
management estimates and judgments about matters that are
uncertain:
•
revenue recognition;
•
advance or guaranteed licensor royalty payments;
•
long-lived assets;
•
goodwill;
•
software development costs;
•
stock-based compensation; and
•
income taxes.
Revenue
Recognition
We derive our revenues primarily by licensing software products
in the form of mobile games. License arrangements with our end
users can be on a perpetual or subscription basis. A perpetual
license gives an end user the right to use the licensed game on
the registered mobile handset on a perpetual basis. A
subscription license gives an end user the right to use the
licensed game on the registered handset for a limited period of
time, usually one month. We distribute our products through
primarily wireless carriers, which market our games to end
users. Carriers usually bill license fees for perpetual and
subscription licenses upon download of the game software by the
end user. Subsequent billings for subscription licenses are
generally billed monthly. We apply the provisions of Statement
of Position
97-2,
Software Revenue Recognition, as amended by Statement of
Position
98-9,
Modification of
SOP 97-2,
Software Revenue Recognition, With Respect to Certain
Transactions, to all transactions.
We recognize revenues from our games when persuasive evidence of
an arrangement exists, the game has been delivered, the fee is
fixed or determinable, and the collection of the resulting
receivable is probable. For both perpetual and subscription
licenses, we consider a signed license agreement to be evidence
of an arrangement with a carrier and a “clickwrap”
agreement to be evidence of an arrangement with an end user. For
these licenses, we define delivery as the download of the game
by the end user.
We estimate revenues from carriers in the current period when
reasonable estimates of these amounts can be made. Several
carriers provide reliable interim preliminary reporting and
others report sales data within a reasonable time frame
following the end of each month, both of which allow us to make
reasonable estimates of revenues and therefore to recognize
revenues during the reporting period when the end user licenses
the game. Determination of the appropriate amount of revenue
recognized involves judgments and estimates that we believe are
reasonable, but it is possible that actual results may differ
from our estimates. When we receive the final carrier reports,
to the extent not received within a reasonable time frame
following the end of each month, we record any differences
between estimated revenues and actual revenues in the next
reporting period once we determine the actual amounts.
Historically, the license revenues on the final revenue report
have not differed materially from the final settlement from the
carrier. Revenues earned from certain carriers may not be
reasonably estimated. If we are unable to reasonably estimate
the amount of revenue to be recognized in the current period, we
recognize revenues upon the receipt of a carrier revenue report
and when our portion of a game’s licensed revenues is fixed
or determinable and collection is probable. In order to mitigate
the risk of a material misstatement, our management reviews the
revenues by carrier by game on a weekly basis to identify
unusual trends that could indicate a
misstatement. If we deem a carrier not to be creditworthy, we
defer all revenues from the arrangement with that carrier until
we receive payment and all other revenue recognition criteria
have been met.
In accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force, or EITF, Issue
No. 99-19,
Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal Versus Net as an
Agent, we recognize as revenues the amount the carrier
reports as payable to us upon the sale of our games, which is
net of any service or other fees earned and deducted by the
carrier. We have evaluated our carrier agreements and have
determined that we are not the principal when selling our games
through carriers. Key indicators that we evaluated in reaching
this determination included:
•
wireless subscribers directly contract with their carriers,
which have most of the service interaction and are generally
viewed as the primary obligor by the subscribers;
•
carriers generally have significant control over the types of
games that they offer to their subscribers;
•
carriers are directly responsible for billing and collecting
fees from their subscribers, including the resolution of billing
disputes;
•
carriers generally pay us a fixed percentage of the revenues or
a fixed fee for each game;
•
carriers generally must approve the price of our games in
advance of their sale to subscribers, and our more significant
carriers generally have the ability to set the ultimate price
charged to their subscribers; and
•
we have limited risks, including no inventory risk and limited
credit risk.
Advance or
Guaranteed Licensor Royalty Payments
Advance or guaranteed licensor royalty payments are fees that we
pay to branded content owners for use of their intellectual
property, including trademarks or copyrights, in the development
of our games. Advance royalties are paid in advance of any game
sales to end users. Guaranteed royalties represent the minimum
royalty payments to be paid pursuant to the terms of the license
agreement regardless of the ultimate volume of game sales to end
users.
We record advance royalty payments made to content licensors as
prepaid royalties on our balance sheet when payment is made to
the licensor. We recognize royalties in cost of revenues based
upon the revenues derived from the relevant game multiplied by
the applicable royalty rate. If our licensors earn royalties in
excess of their advance royalties, we also recognize these
excess royalties as cost of revenues in the period they are
earned by the licensor. If applicable, we will record a
write-down of prepaid royalties or accrue for future guaranteed
royalties that are in excess of anticipated demand or net
realizable value. At each balance sheet date, we perform a
detailed review of prepaid royalties and guarantees that
considers multiple factors, including demand forecast, game life
cycle status, game development plans and current and anticipated
sales levels.
Long-Lived
Assets
We evaluate our long-lived assets, including property and
equipment and intangible assets with finite lives, for
impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying value of these assets may not be recoverable
in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. Factors
considered important that could result in an impairment review
include significant underperformance relative to expected
historical or projected future operating results, significant
changes in the manner of use of the acquired assets, significant
negative industry or economic trends, and a significant decline
in our stock price for a sustained period of time. We recognize
impairment based on the difference between the fair value of the
asset and its carrying value. Fair value is generally measured
based on either quoted market prices, if applicable, or a
discounted cash flow analysis.
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, we do not amortize goodwill or other
intangible assets with indefinite lives but rather test them for
impairment. SFAS No. 142 requires us to perform an
impairment review of our goodwill balance at least annually,
which we do as of September 30 each year, and also whenever
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying
amount of these assets may not be recoverable. In our impairment
review, we look at two of our reporting units — the
United States and EMEA — since none of our goodwill is
attributable to our third operating unit, the rest of the world.
We compare the fair value of each unit to its carrying value,
including goodwill. If the carrying value, including goodwill,
exceeds the fair value, we perform an allocation of the
unit’s fair value to its identifiable tangible and
nongoodwill intangible assets and liabilities. This allows us to
determine an implied fair value for the unit’s goodwill. We
then compare the implied fair value of the unit’s goodwill
with the carrying value of the unit’s goodwill. If the
carrying value of the unit’s goodwill is greater than its
implied fair value, we would recognize an impairment charge for
the difference. To date, no unit’s carrying value has
exceeded its fair value, and thus we have taken no goodwill
impairment charges.
Software
Development Costs
We apply the principles of SFAS No. 86, Accounting
for the Costs of Computer Software to Be Sold, Leased, or
Otherwise Marketed. SFAS No. 86 requires that
software development costs incurred in conjunction with product
development be charged to research and development expense until
technological feasibility is established. Thereafter, until the
product is released for sale, software development costs must be
capitalized and reported at the lower of unamortized cost or net
realizable value of the related product. We have adopted the
“tested working model” approach to establishing
technological feasibility for our games. Under this approach, we
do not consider a game in development to have passed the
technological feasibility milestone until we have produced a
model of the game that contains essentially all the
functionality and features of the final game and have tested the
model to ensure that it works as expected. To date, we have not
incurred significant costs between the establishment of
technological feasibility and the release of a game for sale;
thus, we have expensed all software development costs as
incurred. In the future, we will consider the following factors
in determining whether costs should be capitalized: the emerging
nature of the mobile game market; the gradual evolution of the
wireless carrier platforms and mobile handsets for which we
develop games; the lack of pre-orders or sales history for our
games; the uncertainty regarding a game’s
revenue-generating potential; our lack of control over the
carrier distribution channel resulting in uncertainty as to
when, if ever, a game will be available for sale; and our
historical practice of canceling games at any stage of the
development process.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Prior to January 1, 2006, we accounted for stock-based
employee compensation arrangements in accordance with the
provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, or APB
No. 25, and related interpretations, and followed the
disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation. Under APB No. 25,
compensation expense for an option was based on the difference,
if any, on the date of the grant between the fair value of a
company’s common stock and the exercise price of the
option. APB No. 25 required companies to record deferred
stock-based compensation on their balance sheets and amortize it
to expense over the vesting periods of the individual options.
We recorded deferred stock-based compensation of
$2.6 million and $1.1 million related to employee
stock options granted in 2004 and 2005, respectively. We
amortize deferred stock-based compensation using the multiple
option method as prescribed by FASB Interpretation No. 28,
Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable
Stock Option or Award Plans, or FIN 28, over the option
vesting period using an accelerated amortization schedule. We
expensed employee stock-based compensation of $0, $288,000,
$1.5 million and $1.0 million in 2003, 2004 and 2005
and the nine months ended September 30, 2005, respectively.
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the fair value
provisions of SFAS No. 123R, Share-Based
Payments, which supersedes our previous accounting under APB
No. 25. SFAS No. 123R requires the recognition of
compensation expense, using a fair-value based method, for costs
related to all share-based payments including stock options.
SFAS No. 123R requires companies to estimate the fair
value of share-based payment awards on the grant date using an
option-pricing model. We adopted SFAS No. 123R using
the prospective transition method, which required us to apply
SFAS No. 123R to option grants after the required
effective date. For options granted prior to the January 1,2006 effective date that remained unvested on that date, we
continue to recognize compensation expense under the intrinsic
value method of APB No. 25. In addition, we are continuing
to amortize those awards granted prior to January 1, 2006
utilizing an accelerated amortization schedule, while we will
expense all options granted or modified on and after
January 1, 2006 on a straight-line basis. To value awards
granted on or after January 1, 2006, we used the
Black-Scholes option pricing model. We determined the
assumptions used in this pricing model at the grant date. We
based expected volatility on the historical volatility of a peer
group of publicly traded entities. We determined the expected
term of our options based upon historical exercises,
post-vesting cancellations and the options’ contractual
term. We based the risk-free rate for the expected term of the
option on the U.S. Treasury Constant Maturity rate as of
the grant date. We determined the forfeiture rate based upon our
historical experience with option cancellations adjusted for
unusual or infrequent events.
In 2004, 2005 and the nine months ended September 30, 2006,
we issued options to employees with exercise prices that we
determined with hindsight to be below the fair market values of
our common stock at the grant dates. We retrospectively
estimated the fair value of our common stock based upon a number
of factors, including our operating and financial performance,
progress and milestones attained in our business, past sales of
convertible preferred stock, the results of retrospective
valuations performed by a third-party valuation firm, and the
expected valuation that we would obtain in an initial public
offering. These retrospective valuations utilized the
probability-weighted expected return and the option pricing
valuation methodologies. We reviewed these factors and the
events that happened between each valuation date and determined
that the combination of these factors and events reflect a true
measurement of the fair value of our common stock over an
extended period of time and believe that the fair value of our
common stock is appropriately reflected in the table below.
The following table summarizes by grant date the number of
shares subject to options granted between April 26, 2004
and September 30, 2006 and the per share exercise price,
deemed fair value and resulting intrinsic value.
In June 2006, we repriced stock options that we had granted to
15 employees in the first quarter of 2005. We changed no
terms of the original option grants, other than the exercise
price and the term, which we extended from the fifth anniversary
to the tenth anniversary of the grant date. This repricing
related to vested options to purchase 86,879 shares of our
common stock and unvested options to purchase
729,396 shares of our common stock having weighted average
original exercise prices of $0.78 and $0.76 per share,
respectively. We repriced these options at a new exercise price
of $1.30 per share. We accounted for the repricing as a
modification under SFAS No. 123R and thus recorded the
new incremental fair value related to vested awards as
compensation expense on the date of modification. In accordance
with SFAS No. 123R, we will record the incremental
fair value related to the unvested awards, together with
unamortized stock-based compensation expense associated with the
unvested awards as determined under APB No. 25, over the
remaining requisite service period of the option holders. In
connection with the repricing, we recorded stock-based
compensation expense of $59,000 in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. Total incremental compensation cost
resulting from the modification was $150,000. In connection with
this repricing, we followed the provisions of
SFAS No. 123R and eliminated from our balance sheet
the remaining deferred stock-based compensation related to the
modified stock options. Future stock compensation charges for
the modified options will be recorded in accordance with
SFAS No. 123R.
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 123R, our net loss in
the nine months ended September 30, 2006 was higher by
$244,000, net of tax effect, than if we had continued to account
for stock-based compensation under APB No. 25. Basic and
diluted net loss per share for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 would have been $0.02 lower than if we
had not adopted SFAS No. 123R. At September 30,2006, we had $4.0 million of total unrecognized
compensation expense under SFAS No. 123R, net of
estimated forfeitures, that will be recognized over a weighted
average period
of 1.77 years. At September 30, 2006, the aggregate
intrinsic value of outstanding options and exercisable options
was $16.8 million and $5.4 million, respectively.
We account for equity instruments issued to non-employees in
accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123, EITF
Issue
No. 96-18
and FIN 28. In 2003, 2004, 2005 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2006, we granted stock options to
non-employees to purchase 49,000, 344,000, 3,500 and
2,000 shares of our common stock, respectively. At
December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and September 30,2006, we had outstanding non-employee stock options to purchase
59,000, 338,000, 34,000 and 2,000 shares of our common
stock, respectively, with weighted average exercise prices of
$0.06, $0.10, $0.06 and $1.30 per share, respectively. At
September 30, 2006, the outstanding non-employee options
had an exercise price of $1.30, a remaining contractual term of
9.80 years and no intrinsic value. In 2005, we cancelled
certain options issued to consultants in prior years. As these
options were not vested at the time of the cancellation, we
reversed $227,000 of expense recognized in previous years.
Stock-based compensation expense related to options granted to
non-employees was $32,000, $253,000, ($210,000) and $4,000 in
2003, 2004, 2005 and the nine months ended September 30,2006.
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. As
part of the process of preparing our consolidated financial
statements, we are required to estimate our income tax benefit
(provision) in each of the jurisdictions in which we operate.
This process involves estimating our current income tax benefit
(provision) together with assessing temporary differences
resulting from differing treatment of items for tax and
accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax
assets and liabilities, which are included within our
consolidated balance sheet using the enacted tax rates in effect
for the year in which we expect the differences to reverse.
We record a valuation allowance to reduce our deferred tax
assets to an amount that more likely than not will be realized.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2005 and September 30, 2006, our
valuation allowance on our net deferred tax assets was
$6.3 million, $11.4 million and $14.3 million,
respectively. While we have considered future taxable income and
ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in
assessing the need for the valuation allowance, in the event we
were to determine that we would be able to realize our deferred
tax assets in the future in excess of our net recorded amount,
we would need to make an adjustment to the allowance for the
deferred tax asset, which would increase income in the period
that determination was made.
We have not provided federal income taxes on the unremitted
earnings of foreign subsidiaries because these earnings are
intended to be reinvested permanently.
Results of
Operations
The following sections discuss and analyze the changes in the
significant line items in our statements of operations for the
comparison periods identified.
Our revenues increased $13.0 million, or 69%, from
$18.9 million in the nine months ended September 30,2005 to $31.9 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. The increase resulted from sales of
games that we have released since September 30, 2005,
including Ice Age 2, Diner Dash and Driver
Vegas, and sales of games acquired from iFone. Revenues from
iFone games from March 29, 2006, when we acquired it, to
September 30, 2006 totaled approximately $4.8 million,
primarily in Europe and the United States. By utilizing our
carrier relationships and our marketing and development
resources, we were able to increase worldwide distribution and
handset porting of iFone games and thus to increase
significantly the revenues derived from the licenses that we
acquired from iFone. Revenues from our top ten games increased
from $10.1 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 to $18.2 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. International revenues, defined
as revenues generated from carriers whose principal operations
are located outside the United States, increased
$6.2 million from $8.0 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 to $14.2 million in the nine
months ended September 30, 2006. A majority of this
increase resulted from the acquisition of iFone in 2006. The
following wireless carriers accounted for 10% or more of our
revenues in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 or
2006.
Our cost of revenues increased $3.2 million, or 41%, from
$8.0 million in the nine months ended September 30,2005 to $11.2 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. The increase resulted from an increase
in royalties, which was offset by a decrease in amortization of
acquired intangible assets and a decrease in impairment of
prepaid royalties and guarantees. Royalties increased
$4.5 million principally because of higher revenues with
associated royalties, including those acquired from iFone.
Revenues attributable to games based upon branded intellectual
property increased as a percentage of revenues from 74.8% in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 to 85.0% in the nine
months ended September 30, 2006. The average royalty rate
that we paid on games based on licensed intellectual property
decreased from 37% in the nine months ended September 30,2005 to 36% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Amortization of intangible assets decreased by $1.0 million
as completion of amortization in 2006 for certain intangible
assets acquired from Macrospace was only partially offset by the
commencement of amortization of intangible assets acquired in
2006 from iFone.
Gross
Margin
Our gross margin increased from 57.8% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 to 64.9% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 because of the decreased amortization of
intangible assets and the decreased impairment of prepaid
royalties in the nine months ended September 30, 2006
partially offset by the increase in royalties. Without the
effect of amortization of acquired intangible assets, our gross
margin would have been essentially level at 69% in both periods.
Our research and development expenses increased $571,000, or 5%,
from $10.8 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 to $11.3 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. The increase in research and
development costs was primarily due to increases in allocated
facilities costs of $625,000 and salaries and benefits of
$182,000, offset by lower outside services costs of $98,000.
A restructuring that we effected in the fourth quarter of 2005
resulted in the elimination of 17 research and development
employees, but by September 30, 2006 our research and
development staff had increased by seven employees from a year
earlier and salaries and benefits had increased as a result.
Outside services, including fees for third-party development,
porting, localization and testing declined from 10.0% of total
research and development expenses in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 to 8.7% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 because of an increase in internal
resources used to design, develop, port and test new games.
Research and development expenses included $154,000 of
stock-based compensation expense in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 and $100,000 in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. As a percentage of revenues, research
and development expenses declined from 57.1% in the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 to 35.6% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006.
Our sales and marketing expenses increased $2.0 million, or
31%, from $6.4 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2005 to $8.3 million in the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. Most of the increase was
attributable to a $1.4 million increase in salaries and
benefits, as we increased our sales and marketing headcount from
11 to 37 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and
from 32 to 44 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006,
and most of the remaining increase was attributable to increased
allocated facilities costs. We increased staffing to expand our
marketing efforts for our games and the Glu brand, to increase
sales efforts to our new and existing wireless carriers and to
expand our sales and marketing operations into the Asia-Pacific
region. Aside from the increase in headcount in our sales and
marketing functions, the increase in salaries and benefits cost
was due to an increase in variable compensation of $369,000,
primarily an increase in commissions paid to our sales employees
as a result of higher revenue attainment, and $292,000 in
compensation for transitional employees from iFone who were
terminated throughout the second and third quarters of 2006. As
a percentage of revenues, sales and marketing expenses declined
from 33.7% in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 to
26.1% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 as we
completed most of our necessary sales and marketing hiring by
the end of 2005 and thereafter significantly reduced the rate at
which we added personnel. Also, our sales and marketing
activities generated more revenues across a greater number of
carriers and mobile handsets. Sales and marketing expenses
included $107,000 of stock-based compensation expense in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and $131,000 in the
nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Our general and administrative expenses increased
$2.0 million, or 36%, from $5.6 million in the nine
months ended September 30, 2005 to $7.7 million in the
nine months ended September 30, 2006. The increase in
general and administrative expenses was primarily the result of
a $1.5 million increase in salaries and benefits and a
$975,000 increase in consulting and professional fees. We
increased our general and administrative headcount from 13 to 40
in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 and from 37 to
42 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006. Aside from
the increase in headcount in our general and administrative
functions, the increase in salaries and benefits costs was due
to $216,000 in compensation for transitional employees from
iFone, most of whom were terminated during the second and third
quarters of 2006. As a percentage of revenues, general and
administrative expenses declined from 29.9% in the nine months
ended September 30, 2005 to 24.1% in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 as a result of the overall growth of our
revenues, which resulted in economies of scale in our general
and administrative expenses. General and administrative expenses
included $733,000 of stock-based compensation expense in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and $735,000 in the
nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Other Operating
Expenses
Our amortization of intangible assets, such as trademarks,
copyrights and non-competition agreements, acquired from
Macrospace and iFone was relatively constant at $463,000 in the
nine months ended September 30, 2005 and $476,000 in the
nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Our acquired in-process research and development increased from
$0 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 to
$1.5 million in the nine months ended September 30,2006. The acquired in-process research and development charge,
or IPR&D, recorded in 2006 is related to the development of
new games. We determined the value of acquired IPR&D using
the discounted cash flow approach. We calculated the present
value of expected future cash flows attributable to the
in-process technology using a 21% discount rate. This rate
took into account the percentage of completion of the
development effort of approximately 20% and the risks associated
with our developing technology given changes in trends and
technology in the industry. As of September 30, 2005,
acquired IPR&D projects were approximately 90% completed.
Management expects that the remaining projects will be completed
by the end of 2006.
Other
Expenses
Interest and other income (expense), net, decreased from income
of $351,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 to
expense of $904,000 in the nine months ended September 30,2006. This decrease was primarily due to a $1.1 million
expense resulting from an increase in the fair value of warrants
issued to Pinnacle Ventures in conjunction with our loan from
them in May 2006 and $550,000 of interest expense on that loan
in the nine months ended September 30, 2006. The warrants
are subject to revaluation at the balance sheet date and any
changes in fair value will be recorded as a component of other
income (expense). The increase in the value of the warrant was
due to an increase in the value of the underlying preferred
stock during the nine months ended September 30, 2006.
These expenses were partially offset by $295,000 of foreign
currency exchange gains and by increased interest income of
$169,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006.
Income tax benefit (provision) decreased from a benefit of
$943,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 to a
provision of $437,000 in the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 as a result of changes in the valuation
allowance.
Our revenues increased $18.6 million, or 265%, from
$7.0 million in 2004 to $25.7 million in 2005. The
increase resulted from sales of games acquired from Macrospace
in December 2004, sales of games that we released in 2005,
including Deer Hunter, Zuma and FOX Sports
Mobile, and an increase in sales from games introduced prior
to 2005. Revenues from Macrospace games, primarily from Europe,
increased from $65,000 in 2004 to $10.6 million in 2005.
Revenues from our top 10 games increased from $5.6 million
in 2004 to $13.5 million in 2005, of which
$2.3 million resulted from the acquisition of Macrospace.
Our international revenues increased $10.3 million from
$416,000 in 2004 to $10.7 million in 2005. Most of this
increase in international revenues was due to the acquisition of
Macrospace. The following wireless carriers accounted for 10% or
more of our revenues in 2004 or 2005.
Our cost of revenues increased $11.1 million, or 647%, from
$1.7 million in 2004 to $12.8 million in 2005. The
increase resulted from an increase in royalty payments, an
increase in amortization of intangible assets due to the
acquisition of Macrospace, an increase in impairment of prepaid
royalties and guarantees, and impairment of intangible assets
acquired from Macrospace in 2005. Royalties increased
$5.9 million primarily because of higher revenues with
associated royalties and higher average royalty rates for
licensed intellectual property, primarily as a result of the
Macrospace acquisition. Although revenues attributable to games
based upon branded intellectual property decreased as a
percentage of revenues from 81.9% in 2004 to 77.1% in 2005,
revenues attributable to games based upon branded intellectual
property increased by 244% from 2004 to 2005. The average
royalty rate that we paid on games based on licensed
intellectual property increased from 24% in 2004 to 37% in 2005
primarily as a result of the acquisition of Macrospace.
Gross
Margin
Our gross margin decreased from 75.6% in 2004 to 50.0% in 2005.
This decrease was primarily due to increased amortization of
intangible assets, higher royalty rates paid on games acquired
from Macrospace, an increase in impairment of prepaid royalties
and guarantees, and impairment of intangible assets in 2005.
Without the effect of amortization and impairment of acquired
intangible assets, our gross margin would have decreased by
12 percentage points from 77.4% to 65.3% instead of
26 percentage points.
Our research and development expenses increased
$8.1 million, or 125%, from $6.5 million in 2004 to
$14.6 million in 2005. The increase primarily resulted from
a $6.6 million increase in salaries and benefits due to
increases in personnel in the United States and the United
Kingdom, a $600,000 increase in allocated facilities costs and a
$97,000 increase in expenses for outside services. The increase
in these costs and expenses was primarily due to the acquisition
of Macrospace in December 2004. We increased our research and
development staff from 65 at December 31, 2004 to 122 at
December 31, 2005. Despite the absolute increase in
expenses for outside services, these expenses declined as a
percentage of research and development expenses from 19.9% in
2004 to 9.7% in 2005
because of an increase in internal resources used to design,
develop, port and test new games. As a percentage of revenues,
our research and development expenses decreased from 92.2% in
2004 to 56.8% in 2005, primarily as a result of growth in
revenues. Research and development expenses included $28,000 of
stock-based compensation expense in 2004 and $158,000 in 2005.
Our sales and marketing expenses increased $4.8 million, or
131%, from $3.7 million in 2004 to $8.5 million in
2005. The increase resulted from a $2.6 million increase in
salaries and benefits, a $1.7 million increase in spending
on advertising, public relations and corporate branding and a
$466,000 increase in travel and entertainment costs. We
increased our sales and marketing staff from 11 at
December 31, 2004 to 32 at December 31, 2005. We
increased sales and marketing spending to expand the marketing
efforts for our games, to rebrand the company as Glu Mobile in
June 2005 following the acquisition of Macrospace, to expand
marketing of the Glu brand in the United States and to increase
marketing efforts in various European markets after the
acquisition of Macrospace in December 2004. As a percentage of
revenues, sales and marketing expenses declined from 52.6% in
2004 to 33.2% in 2005 as our sales and marketing activities
generated more revenues across a greater number of carriers and
mobile handsets. Sales and marketing expenses included $59,000
of stock-based compensation expense in 2004 and $132,000 in 2005.
Our general and administrative expenses increased
$4.9 million, or 143%, from $3.5 million in 2004 to
$8.4 million in 2005. The increase was due primarily to an
increase of $2.3 million in salaries and benefits resulting
from an increase in headcount with the completion of the
acquisition of Macrospace in December 2004, an increase of
$1.7 million in consulting and professional services costs
and an increase of $533,000 in stock-based compensation. We
increased our general and administrative staff from 13 at
December 31, 2004 to 37 at December 31, 2005. As a
percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses
declined from 49.4% in 2004 to 32.9% in 2005 due to the overall
growth of our revenues, which allowed economies of scale in our
general and administrative expenses. General and administrative
expenses included $454,000 of stock-based compensation expense
in 2004 and $987,000 in 2005.
Other Operating
Expenses
Our amortization of intangible assets increased from $26,000 in
2004 to $616,000 in 2005. This increase was due to the
intangible assets acquired from Macrospace in December 2004.
We had no restructuring charge in 2004; our 2005 restructuring
charge was $450,000. In December 2005, we undertook
restructuring activities in order to reduce operating expenses.
We
eliminated 27 positions, of which 17 were in research and
development, 4 were in sales and marketing and 6 were in general
and administrative. Of the total restructuring charge recorded,
$225,000 was recorded in the United States and $225,000 was
recorded in Europe. These restructuring costs were paid in full
by March 31, 2006.
Other
Expenses
Our interest and other income (expense), net was an expense of
$69,000 in 2004 and income of $541,000 in 2005. The increase was
primarily a result of a $488,000 increase in interest income due
to higher average cash and cash equivalent balances in 2005.
Our income tax benefit increased from $101,000 in 2004 to
$1.6 million in 2005. The increase in the income tax
benefit was primarily due to the net operating loss of
Macrospace in 2005.
Our revenues increased 292% from $1.8 million in 2003 to
$7.0 million in 2004. The increase primarily resulted from
sales of games that we released in 2004 such as Driv3r,
FOX Sports Football and Yao Ming Basketball. In
2003, we had no international revenues compared to $416,000 of
international revenues in 2004.
Cost of revenues increased $1.5 million, or 565%, from
$258,000 in 2003 to $1.7 million in 2004. Royalties
increased from $258,000 in 2003 to $1.4 million in 2004 due
to higher revenues and higher average royalty rates for licensed
properties.
Gross
Margin
Our gross margin as a percentage of revenues decreased from
85.6% in 2003 to 75.6% in 2004. The decrease in our gross profit
as a percentage of revenues resulted from higher royalty rates
paid to licensors on new games released in 2004, and impairment
of prepaid royalties and guarantees and amortization of
intangible assets recorded in 2004.
Research and development expenses increased 93% from
$3.4 million in 2003 to $6.5 million in 2004. The
increase primarily resulted from an increase in salaries and
benefits and outside services related to porting, localization
and certification costs as we increased our development efforts
on new games. Outside services represented approximately 20% of
total research and development expenses in 2003 and 2004, or
$677,000 in 2003 and $1.3 million in 2004. Research and
development expenses included stock-based compensation expense
of $0 in 2003 and $28,000 in 2004.
Sales and marketing expenses increased 430% from $697,000 in
2003 to $3.7 million in 2004. The increase was due to
increased salaries and benefits costs and spending on product
marketing and corporate branding. As a percentage of revenues,
sales and marketing expenses increased from 38.9% in 2003 to
52.6% in 2004 due to our investment in marketing and in sales
and marketing personnel. Sales and marketing expenses included
stock-based compensation expense of $0 in 2003 and $59,000 in
2004.
General and administrative expenses increased 158% from
$1.3 million in 2003 to $3.5 million in 2004. The
increase primarily resulted from increased salaries and benefits
and professional fees. As a
percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses
declined from 75.0% in 2003 to 49.4% in 2004 due to the overall
growth of our revenues, which resulted in economies of scale in
our general and administrative costs. General and administrative
expenses included stock-based compensation expense of $32,000 in
2003 and $454,000 in 2004.
Quarterly
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth unaudited quarterly consolidated
statements of operations data for 2005 and the first three
quarters of 2006. We derived this information from unaudited
consolidated financial statements, which we prepared on the same
basis as our audited consolidated financial statements contained
in this prospectus. In our opinion, these unaudited statements
include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring
adjustments, that we consider necessary for a fair statement of
that information when read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus. The operating results for any quarter should
not be considered indicative of results for any future period.
For the Three
Months Ended
2005
2006
March 31
June 30
September 30
December 31
March 31
June 30(1)
September 30(1)
(In
thousands)
Revenues
$
4,762
$
6,984
$
7,125
$
6,780
$
8,073
$
11,443
$
12,347
Cost of revenues:
Royalties
1,158
1,897
2,178
2,023
2,564
3,499
3,687
Impairment of prepaid royalties and
guarantees
72
453
—
1,120
34
164
26
Amortization of intangible assets
759
759
684
621
118
553
553
Impairment of intangible assets
—
—
—
1,103
—
—
—
Total cost of revenues
1,989
3,109
2,862
4,867
2,716
4,216
4,266
Gross profit
2,773
3,874
4,263
1,913
5,357
7,227
8,081
Operating expenses:
Research and development
3,648
3,374
3,754
3,781
3,189
3,884
4,273
Sales and marketing
1,936
2,307
2,116
2,156
2,202
3,126
2,989
General and administrative
1,436
1,950
2,254
2,794
1,852
2,655
3,177
Amortization of intangible assets
154
154
154
154
154
154
168
Restructuring charge
—
—
—
450
—
—
—
Acquired in-process research and
development
—
—
—
—
1,500
—
—
Total operating expenses
7,174
7,785
8,278
9,335
8,897
9,819
10,607
Loss from operations
(4,401
)
(3,910
)
(4,015
)
(7,422
)
(3,540
)
(2,592
)
(2,526
)
Interest and other income
(expense), net
(87
)
100
338
190
152
50
(1,106
)
Loss before income taxes and
cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
(4,488
)
(3,810
)
(3,677
)
(7,232
)
(3,388
)
(2,542
)
(3,632
)
Income tax benefit (provision)
354
274
316
677
(106
)
(139
)
(192
)
Net loss before cumulative effect
of change in accounting principle
(4,134
)
(3,536
)
(3,361
)
(6,555
)
(3,494
)
(2,681
)
(3,824
)
Cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
—
—
(315
)
—
—
—
—
Net loss
$
(4,134
)
$
(3,536
)
$
(3,676
)
$
(6,555
)
$
(3,494
)
$
(2,681
)
$
(3,824
)
(1)
We acquired iFone on March 29,2006, and our results of operations include the results of
operations of iFone after that date.
The following table sets forth our historical results, for the
periods indicated, as a percentage of our revenues.
For the Three
Months Ended
2005
2006
March 31
June 30
September 30
December 31
March 31
June 30
September 30
Revenues
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%
Cost of revenues:
Royalties
24.3
27.2
30.6
29.8
31.8
30.6
29.9
Impairment of prepaid royalties and
guarantees
1.5
6.5
—
16.5
0.4
1.4
0.2
Amortization of intangible assets
16.0
10.8
9.6
9.2
1.5
4.8
4.5
Impairment of intangible assets
—
—
—
16.3
—
—
—
Total cost of revenues
41.8
44.5
40.2
71.8
33.6
36.8
34.6
Gross profit
58.2
55.5
59.8
28.2
66.4
63.2
65.4
Operating expenses:
Research and development
76.6
48.3
52.7
55.8
39.5
33.9
34.6
Sales and marketing
40.6
33.0
29.7
31.8
27.3
27.3
24.2
General and administrative
30.2
27.9
31.6
41.2
22.9
23.2
25.7
Amortization of intangible assets
3.2
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.0
1.3
1.4
Restructuring charge
—
—
—
6.6
—
—
—
Acquired in-process research and
development
—
—
—
—
18.6
—
—
Total operating expenses
150.6
111.5
116.2
137.7
110.3
85.8
85.9
Loss from operations
(92.4
)
(56.0
)
(56.4
)
(109.5
)
(43.9
)
(22.6
)
(20.5
)
Interest and other
income/(expense), net
(1.8
)
1.4
4.7
2.8
1.9
0.4
(9.0
)
Loss before income taxes and
cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
(94.2
)
(54.6
)
(51.7
)
(106.7
)
(42.0
)
(22.2
)
(29.5
)
Income tax benefit (provision)
7.4
3.9
4.4
10.0
(1.3
)
(1.2
)
(1.6
)
Net loss before cumulative effect
of change in accounting principle
(86.8
)
(50.6
)
(47.3
)
(96.7
)
(43.3
)
(23.4
)
(31.1
)
Cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
—
—
(4.4
)
—
—
—
—
Net loss
(86.8
)%
(50.6
)%
(51.7
)%
(96.7
)%
(43.3
)%
(23.4
)%
(31.1
)%
Our revenues generally increased in conjunction with the
introduction of new games, the expansion of our wireless carrier
distribution channel and the porting of our games to additional
mobile handsets. Revenues in the second and third quarters of
2006 were favorably impacted by revenues generated from
increased porting and distribution of games acquired from iFone
in late March. Revenues from iFone games in the second and third
quarters of 2006 were $1.7 million and $3.1 million,
respectively.
Many new mobile handset models are released in the fourth
calendar quarter to coincide with the holiday shopping season.
Because many end users download our games soon after they
purchase new handsets, we may experience seasonal sales
increases based on this key holiday selling period. However, due
to the time between handset purchases and game purchases, most
of this holiday impact occurs for us in our first quarter. For a
variety of reasons, we may experience seasonal sales decreases
during the summer, particularly in Europe, which is
predominantly reflected in our third quarter. In addition to
these possible seasonal patterns, we seek to release many of our
games in conjunction with specific events, such as the release
of a movie or console game. Initial spikes in revenues as a
result of successful new releases may create further aberrations
in our revenue patterns.
Our cost of revenues increased over the above periods as a
result of increased royalty payments to licensors and developers
caused by increased revenues. However, our cost of revenues did
not
increase sequentially in all quarters because of periodic
impairment charges and, in the first quarter of 2006, a
significant reduction in amortization of intangible assets
because a substantial part of the intangible assets acquired
from Macrospace became fully amortized in December 2005.
Amortization of intangible assets increased in the second
quarter of 2006 following the acquisition of iFone.
Our quarterly research and development expenses were relatively
constant in 2005 as we were able to use our technology to
create, develop and port a larger number of games without any
significant change in staffing. The decrease in research and
development expenses from the fourth quarter of 2005 to the
first quarter of 2006 was due to a reduction in employee costs
resulting from a restructuring initiated in December 2005. A
total of 17 research and development employees were terminated
as part of this restructuring effort. The increase in research
and development expenses from the first quarter of 2006 to the
second quarter of 2006 was primarily due to additional research
and development activities with the completion of the iFone
acquisition. The increase in research and development expenses
from the second quarter of 2006 to the third quarter of 2006 was
due to an increase in research and development personnel because
of the number of games acquired from iFone.
Our sales and marketing expenses were relatively constant in
2005 and the first quarter of 2006, with the exception of the
second quarter of 2005 when we increased marketing expenses in
connection with our corporate name change and rebranding
efforts. The increase in sales and marketing expenses from the
first quarter of 2006 to the second quarter of 2006 was due to
additional sales and marketing activities with the completion of
the iFone acquisition.
Our general and administrative expenses generally increased each
quarter as a result of increased salaries and benefits and
consulting fees to support the growth in our business. The
decrease in general and administrative expenses from the fourth
quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of 2006 was due to a
reduction in employee costs (resulting from the restructuring
initiated in December 2005), lower professional services fees
and lower allocated facilities costs. A total of six general and
administrative employees were terminated as part of this
restructuring effort. The increase in general and administrative
expenses from the first quarter of 2005 to the second quarter of
2006 was due to additional general and administrative activities
and personnel with the completion of the iFone acquisition.
Our acquired in-process research and development expense in the
first quarter of 2006 related to certain in-process projects
assumed in the 2006 acquisition of iFone.
We adopted FSP
150-5 in
July 2005 and thus, in the third quarter of 2005, accounted for
the cumulative effect of this change in accounting principle.
Thereafter, in each quarter, we recorded the increase in fair
value in our outstanding warrants to purchase preferred stock as
part of interest and other income (expense), net.
Cash flows (used in) provided by
investing activities
(124
)
(10,007
)
(16,706
)
2,292
Cash flows provided by financing
activities
5,408
20,184
26,692
11,208
Since our inception, we have incurred recurring losses and
negative annual cash flows from operating activities and we had
an accumulated deficit of $43.7 million as of
September 30, 2006. Our primary sources of liquidity have
historically been private placements of shares of our preferred
stock with aggregate proceeds of $57.4 million and
borrowings under our credit facilities with aggregate proceeds
of $12.0 million. In the future, we anticipate that our
primary sources of liquidity will come from cash generated from
the proceeds of this offering and our operating activities.
Operating
Activities
We used $10.6 million of net cash in operating activities
in the nine months ended September 30, 2006. This use of
cash was primarily the result of a net loss of
$10.0 million (partially offset by non-cash expenses,
including $1.7 million of amortization of intangible
assets, a $1.5 million acquired in-process research and
development charge and $1.1 million of depreciation and
amortization), and a $7.1 million increase in net operating
assets. This increase in net operating assets was primarily due
to a $2.9 million decrease in accounts payable, a
$2.2 million decrease in other accrued liabilities and a
$2.0 million increase in accounts receivable.
We used $10.3 million of net cash in operating activities
in 2005. This use of cash was primarily the result of a net loss
of $17.9 million, partially offset by non-cash expenses
including $3.4 million of amortization of intangible
assets, $1.6 million of impairment of prepaid royalties and
guarantees, $1.3 million of stock-based compensation
expense and $1.1 million of impairment of intangible assets.
We used $9.2 million of net cash in operating activities in
2004. This use of cash was primarily the result of a net loss of
$8.3 million, an increase in prepaid royalties of
$1.9 million and an increase in accounts receivable of
$1.4 million, partially offset by an increase in account
payable of $1.6 million.
We used $4.2 million of net cash in operating activities in
2003. This use of cash was primarily the result of a net loss of
$3.8 million and an increase in accounts receivable of
$812,000.
Investing
Activities
Our primary investing activities have consisted of purchases and
sales of short-term investments, purchases of property and
equipment, and, in 2004 and 2006, the acquisitions of Macrospace
and iFone, respectively.
We generated $2.3 million as net cash from investing
activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2006.
This net cash resulted from net sales of short-term investments
of $10.3 million, partially offset by the acquisition of
iFone for cash and stock, net of cash acquired, of
$7.4 million and purchases of property and equipment of
$612,000.
We used $16.7 million of net cash in investing activities
in 2005, $13.7 million of which represented net purchases
of short-term investments and the remaining $3.0 million of
which represented purchases of property and equipment, such as
our enterprise resource planning, or ERP, system and our revenue
data warehouse.
We used $10.0 million of net cash in investment activities
in 2004, $5.5 million of which represented purchases of
short-term investments and $4.3 million of which
represented the acquisition of Macrospace for cash and stock,
net of cash acquired.
Financing
Activities
We generated $11.2 million of net cash from financing
activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2006,
substantially all of which came from the proceeds of a loan from
Pinnacle Ventures, described below.
We generated $26.7 million of net cash from financing
activities in 2005, substantially all of which came from the
issuance and sale of our preferred stock. We used
$1.1 million to repay debt issued in connection with the
Macrospace acquisition.
We generated $20.2 million of net cash from financing
activities in 2004, substantially all of which came from the
issuance and sale of our preferred stock.
We generated $5.4 million of net cash from financing
activities in 2003, $4.5 million of which came from the
issuance and sale of our preferred stock and $1.0 million
of which came from the issuance and sale of convertible
promissory notes, which were later converted into our preferred
stock.
Sufficiency of
Current Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-Term
Investments
Our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments were
$21.6 million as of December 31, 2005 and
$14.4 million as of September 30, 2006. We believe
that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments and
any cash flow from operations will be sufficient to meet our
anticipated cash needs, including for working capital purposes,
capital expenditures and various contractual obligations, for at
least the next 12 months. We may, however, require
additional cash resources due to changed business conditions or
other future developments, including any investments or
acquisitions we may decide to pursue. If these sources are
insufficient to satisfy our cash requirements, we may seek to
sell debt securities or additional equity securities or to
obtain a credit facility. The sale of convertible debt
securities or additional equity securities could result in
additional dilution to our stockholders. The incurrence of
indebtedness would result in debt service obligations and could
result in operating and financial covenants that would restrict
our operations. In addition, there can be no assurance that any
additional financing will be available on acceptable terms, if
at all. We anticipate that, from time to time, we may evaluate
acquisitions of complementary businesses, technologies or
assets. However, there are no current understandings,
commitments or agreements with respect to any acquisitions.
Contractual
Obligations
The following is a summary of our contractual obligations as of
September 30, 2006:
The amounts in the table include interest payments on the loan.
In May 2006, we borrowed $12.0 million from Pinnacle
Ventures. This loan has an interest rate of 11% and is
collateralized by all of our assets. We are obligated to pay
only interest in 2006. Thereafter, we are obligated to pay 30
equal monthly payments of principal and accrued interest. If we
elect to make any advance payments, they would be subject to a
premium equal to 3% of the principal amount repaid unless the
payments were made in connection with an issuance of shares of
stock that would be publicly traded on a national market or
exchange, in connection with a change in our control or more
than 18 months after the funding of the loan. We intend to
repay the entire outstanding principal amount of the loan and
all accrued interest from the net proceeds of this offering.
(2)
We have entered into license and development arrangements with
various owners of brands and other intellectual property so that
we can create and publish games for mobile handsets based on
that intellectual property. Pursuant to some of these
agreements, we are required to pay guaranteed royalties over the
term of the contracts regardless of actual game sales.
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements
We do not have any relationships with unconsolidated entities or
financial partners, such as entities often referred to as
structured finance or special purpose entities, which would have
been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance
sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited
purposes. In addition, we do not have any undisclosed borrowings
or debt, and we have not entered into any synthetic leases. We
are, therefore, not materially exposed to any financing,
liquidity, market or credit risk that could arise if we had
engaged in such relationships.
Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157
establishes a framework for measuring the fair value of assets
and liabilities. This framework is intended to provide increased
consistency in how fair value determinations are made under
various existing accounting standards that permit, or in some
cases require, estimates of fair market value.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those
fiscal years. Earlier adoption is encouraged, provided that the
reporting entity has not yet issued financial statements for
that fiscal year, including any financial statements for an
interim period within that fiscal year. We are currently in the
process of evaluating the impact of SFAS No. 157 on
our consolidated financial statements.
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes — an
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, which
clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes
recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in
accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. This Interpretation prescribes a comprehensive model
for how a company should recognize, measure, present and
disclose in its financials statements uncertain tax positions
that it has taken or expects to take on a tax return, including
a decision whether to file or not to file a return in a
particular jurisdiction. Under the Interpretation, the financial
statements must reflect expected future tax consequences of
these positions presuming the taxing authorities’ full
knowledge of the position and all relevant facts. The
Interpretation also revises disclosure requirements and
introduces a prescriptive, annual, tabular roll-forward of the
unrecognized tax benefits. This Interpretation is effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We will
adopt this provision in the first quarter of 2007 and are
currently evaluating the impact of this provision on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued
Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, Considering the
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements When Quantifying
Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements, or
SAB No. 108, which provides interpretive guidance on
how the effects of the carryover or reversal of prior year
misstatements should be considered in quantifying a current year
misstatement. We will be required to adopt the provisions of
SAB No. 108 in our fiscal
year 2006. We do not believe the adoption of
SAB No. 108 will have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Interest Rate
and Credit Risk
We have exposure to interest rate risk that relates primarily to
our investment portfolio. All of our current investments are
classified as cash equivalents or short-term investments and
carried at cost, which approximates market value. We do not
currently use or plan to use derivative financial instruments in
our investment portfolio. The risk associated with fluctuating
interest rates is limited to our investment portfolio, and we do
not believe that a 10% change in interest rates would have a
significant impact on our interest income, operating results or
liquidity.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2005 and September 30,2006, our cash and cash equivalents were maintained by financial
institutions in the United States, the United Kingdom and Hong
Kong, and our current deposits are likely in excess of insured
limits. We believe that the financial institutions that hold our
investments are financially sound and, accordingly, minimal
credit risk exists with respect to these investments.
Our accounts receivable primarily relate to revenues earned from
domestic and international wireless carriers. We perform ongoing
credit evaluations of our carriers’ financial condition but
generally require no collateral from them. At December 31,2004, Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel accounted for 30% and
22%, respectively, of our total accounts receivable. At
December 31, 2005, Verizon Wireless accounted for 23% of
our total accounts receivable. At September 30, 2006,
Verizon Wireless, Vodafone and Sprint Nextel accounted for 21%,
11% and 10% of our total accounts receivable, respectively.
Foreign
Currency Risk
The functional currencies of our United States and United
Kingdom operations are the United States Dollar, or USD, and the
pound sterling respectively. A significant portion of our
business is conducted in currencies other than the USD or the
pound sterling. Our revenues are usually denominated in the
functional currency of the carrier. Operating expenses are
usually in the local currency of the operating unit, which
mitigates a portion of the exposure related to currency
fluctuations. Intercompany transactions between our domestic and
foreign operations are denominated in either the USD or the
pound sterling. At month-end, foreign currency-denominated
accounts receivable and intercompany balances are marked to
market and unrealized gains and losses are included in interest
and other income (expense), net.
Our foreign exchange gains and losses have been generated
primarily from fluctuations in the pound sterling versus the USD
and in the Euro versus the pound sterling. It is uncertain
whether these currency trends will continue. In the future, we
may experience foreign exchange losses on our accounts
receivable and intercompany receivables and payables. Foreign
exchange losses could have a material adverse effect on our
business, operating results and financial condition.
Inflation
We do not believe that inflation has had a material effect on
our business, financial condition or results of operations. If
our costs were to become subject to significant inflationary
pressures, we might not be able to offset these higher costs
fully through price increases. Our inability or failure to do so
could harm our business, operating results and financial
condition.
Glu Mobile is a leading global publisher of mobile games. We
have developed and published a portfolio of more than 100 casual
and traditional games to appeal to a broad cross section of the
over one billion subscribers served by our more than 150
wireless carriers and other distributors. We create games and
related applications based on third-party licensed brands and
other intellectual property, as well as on our own original
brands and intellectual property. Our games based on licensed
intellectual property include Deer Hunter, Diner
Dash, Monopoly, Sonic the Hedgehog, World
Series of Poker and Zuma. Our original games based on
our own intellectual property include Alpha Wing,
Ancient Empires, Blackjack Hustler, Stranded
and Super K.O. Boxing. We were one of the top three
mobile game publishers in terms of mobile game market share in
North America during the third quarter of 2006 as measured by
NPD Group, Inc., a market research firm, in its September 2006
“Mobile Game Track Highlight Report,” and in terms of
unit sales volume in North America and Europe among titles
tracked by m:metrics, another market research firm.
Juniper Research, a market research firm, in its June 2006
“Mobile Games: Subscription & Download,
2006-2011”
report, estimates that the worldwide market for mobile games
will grow from $3.1 billion in 2006 to $10.5 billion
in 2009, a compound annual growth rate of 50.2%. We believe that
the rapid growth of the mobile game market has been driven by
continued advances in wireless communications technology,
proliferation of multimedia-enabled mobile handsets, increasing
availability of high-quality mobile games and increasing
end-user awareness of, and demand for, mobile games.
We seek to attract end users by developing engaging content that
is designed specifically to take advantage of the portability
and networked nature of mobile handsets. We leverage the
marketing resources and distribution infrastructure of wireless
carriers and the brands and other intellectual property of
third-party content owners, allowing us to focus our efforts on
developing and publishing high-quality mobile games. We believe
that the quality of our games, the breadth of our distribution
and licensing relationships, and the advantages we gain through
our technology will enable us to gain share in this growing
market.
By using carriers’ distribution infrastructures, we afford
end users of our games the convenience of paying through their
mobile phone bill, while eliminating for us the traditional
publishing costs associated with packaging, shipping, stocking,
inventory management and return processing. For the first nine
months of 2006, our largest wireless carrier customers in each
region by revenues were Verizon Wireless, Sprint Nextel,
Cingular Wireless and
T-Mobile USA
in North America; Vodafone, Hutchinson 3G, Orange and
Telefónica Móviles in Europe; TelCel and Vivo in Latin
America; and Vodafone, Hutchinson 3G Australia and Telecom New
Zealand in Asia Pacific. Carriers market and distribute our
games, retaining a portion of the gross fee paid by their
subscribers for purchasing or accessing our games and paying to
us the remainder. Thus, the carriers have the opportunity to
increase their average revenue per subscriber.
By licensing intellectual property from third-party content
owners, we provide end users brands and content with which they
are familiar, while eliminating for us the need to develop all
of our games from our own intellectual property. Our branded
content owners, such as Atari, Celador (from which we license
the rights to Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? in some
European and Asian countries), Fox, PlayFirst, PopCap Games,
Sega Europe and Turner Broadcasting, provide us with well-known
consumer brands and other intellectual property on which we have
based mobile games. When we use licensed content in the
development of our games, we share with the content owner a
portion of the amount paid to us by carriers, thereby allowing
it to derive incremental revenue from its content. We also
provide a solution for content owners to the development and
distribution challenges associated with creating and
distributing their own mobile games.
We believe that our carriers and content owners value our global
reach, the consistently high quality of our game portfolio, the
creativity of our development studios, and our mobile-specific
development expertise, including our ability to port games to
more than 1,000 different handset models with various
combinations of underlying technologies, user interfaces, keypad
layouts, screen resolutions, sound capabilities and other
carrier-specific customizations.
Industry
Background
The growth of the mobile entertainment market is being shaped by
an intersection of trends in the wireless communications and
entertainment industries since wireless carriers provide the
primary marketing and distribution channel for mobile game and
branded content owners provide the licensing relationships that
facilitate creating a large and diverse portfolio of
recognizable games. Juniper Research, in its June 2006
“Mobile Games: Subscription & Download,
2006-2011”
report, estimates that the percentage of wireless subscribers
who download mobile games in our two largest markets, North
America and Europe, will increase from 5.5% in 2006 to 14.6% in
2009 and from 5.6% in 2006 to 14.0% in 2009, respectively.
The mobile game market differs substantially from the
traditional console game market. Mobile games typically have
significantly lower development and distribution costs and
longer life cycles than console games. Console game sales depend
upon the product cycles of the consoles themselves, with large
generational shifts between versions of each of the major
console platforms every few years. In contrast, the mobile
platform is characterized by a gradual evolution of features and
capabilities in the many new handsets introduced each year by a
large number of manufacturers and carriers. Consumers typically
use their console games in the confines of their home, while
mobile games are available in all the settings where consumers
take their mobile handsets. Furthermore, console games are
usually developed for a few console platforms at most, which
means that the development costs are mostly associated with the
original creation and development of the game. However, once
developed, mobile games may need to be ported to more than 1,000
different handset models, many with different technological
requirements. Therefore, the ability to port mobile games
quickly and cost effectively can be a competitive differentiator
among mobile game publishers and a barrier to entry for other
potential market entrants.
The networked nature of mobile games allows publishers the
opportunity to improve the profitability of a game through
decisions on porting, pricing, localization and marketing. Some
games, especially those tied to films, television shows or
console games with specific launch “day-and-date”
requirements, ideally are launched simultaneously on a global
basis with a large number of carriers. Other games are launched
in stages by regions or by carriers. These games require initial
launch on fewer handsets than games with global
“day-and-date” launch requirements. Games released in
stages offer the opportunity to improve profitability by
adjusting porting and marketing support costs based upon the
initial success of the game.
We believe that the following trends will continue to shape the
growing market for mobile entertainment:
Increasing Quality and Broadening Appeal of Mobile
Games. We believe that improving quality and
greater availability of mobile games are contributing to
increased end-user awareness of and demand for mobile
entertainment. Wireless carriers and mobile game publishers now
offer games across a diverse range of genres in an effort to
appeal to a broad cross section of end users with mobile phones.
For example, casual games, such as Diner Dash, are easy
to learn and play and therefore well-suited to the mass market
demographics of wireless subscribers. Carriers and mobile game
publishers also have begun to focus on games where the brand,
such as Monopoly, or the name, such as Super K.O.
Boxing, clearly communicates the nature of the game within
the handset’s game menu and therefore increases the
likelihood of purchase or subscription. In addition, mobile
entertainment publishers are introducing games, such as Deer
Hunter, that are tailored to specific
regional, age and gender demographics. We believe that these
factors will contribute to rapid growth in the percentage of
subscribers who download games.
Increasing Complexity of Developing and Publishing Mobile
Games. Mobile game publishers have emerged to
address the requirements specific to mobile games, such as
creating games to operate within the resource constraints of
handsets, negotiating the requisite distribution agreements, and
developing the technical expertise required to port and
customize a game to more than 1,000 handset models and, with
regional and language requirements, to create thousands of
versions of that game. Some companies in related industries,
such as carriers, traditional game publishers and other branded
content owners, have established internal mobile game
development or publishing capabilities. We believe that these
companies are becoming increasingly aware of the complexities of
developing mobile games and, as a result, are increasingly
partnering with a small group of leading publishers that can
manage the complexities specific to mobile games and related
applications.
Increasing Importance of Scale in Licensing and Wireless
Carrier Partnerships. Carriers increasingly
are seeking mobile game publishers with large and diverse
portfolios of high-quality games based on well-known brands that
are likely to appeal to a large number of the carriers’
subscribers. Branded content owners prefer global distribution
in order to match the breadth of distribution of their brands in
other entertainment media. Thus, they increasingly are seeking
mobile game publishers with a global network of carrier
relationships and a history of successfully launching
high-quality games with premium deck placement on a number of
mobile handsets. As a result, scale in content and carrier
relationships is mutually reinforcing and has resulted in
increasing differentiation between mobile game publishers that
have achieved sufficient scale in licensing and carrier
relationships and those that have not. We believe that only a
small group of leading mobile entertainment publishers has
established the licensing relationships necessary to create
large and diverse portfolios of well-known games and the carrier
relationships necessary to facilitate global distribution.
Continuing Advances in the Multimedia Capabilities of
Mobile Handsets. Mobile games capitalize on
the ongoing and accelerating improvement of multimedia
capabilities in handsets. The increasing screen resolutions,
audio and graphics capabilities, processing power, battery life,
memory and storage capabilities, and the increasing
affordability of these handsets, are enabling the delivery of a
higher quality visual and audio entertainment experience to a
broader group of end users.
Accelerating Deployment of Advanced Wireless
Networks. Advances in wireless networks are
increasingly enabling convenient and rapid downloads of large
files such as mobile games. In addition, these advanced networks
have improved merchandising capabilities as well as flexible
provisioning and billing capabilities for data applications,
such as pay per play, providing the infrastructure necessary for
the purchase and download of mobile games. We believe that
incremental revenue from data-centric usages, such as accessing
the Internet and downloading mobile games, helps wireless
carriers recoup their multi-billion dollar investments in
next-generation infrastructure. Juniper Research, in its June
2006 “Mobile Games: Subscription & Download,
2006-2011”
report, estimates that the number of wireless subscribers on
2.5G and 3G networks, which facilitate the latest and highest
quality mobile games, will grow from 970 million
subscribers in 2006 to 1.8 billion subscribers in 2010.
Our Competitive
Strengths
We believe we have a proven capability to develop high-quality
mobile games that engage end users. Our portfolio of more than
100 games includes a variety of genres and is designed to appeal
to the diverse interests of the broad wireless subscriber
population. As the mobile entertainment market continues to
develop, we believe that wireless carriers and branded content
owners will increasingly recognize the benefits of partnering
with independent mobile entertainment publishers that have
achieved the scale necessary to develop and publish a consistent
portfolio of high-quality games and
to distribute them globally. We believe that we will continue to
be attractive to carriers, content owners and end users because
of the following strengths:
Diverse Portfolio of Award-Winning High-Quality Mobile
Games. We have developed and published more
than 100 casual and traditional games across a number of genres,
including action, board games, card/casino, puzzle, sports,
strategy/RPG and TV/movie. No single game contributed more than
10% of our revenues in 2005 or the first nine months of 2006. We
develop most of our games, including both original games and
those based on licensed brands and intellectual property, at our
studios in San Mateo, California and London, England. We
believe that internal development of our games is a key factor
in their consistently high quality. Our games are widely
recognized for innovation and quality by industry reviewers.
Based on numerical ratings by industry review websites, IGN
Entertainment, Modojo and WGWorld, we ranked first in terms of
average game quality for mobile games released in the first nine
months of 2006. We have received numerous industry awards for
our games, including IGN Entertainment’s 2005 Editor’s
Choice award for best wireless puzzle game for Zuma, The
Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences’ 2006 Game of the
Year award for Ancient Empires II, and the 2005
award for Best Mobile Sports Game by CNET’s Gamespot for
Deer Hunter. Industry awards such as these increase our
overall brand recognition and help us to gain premium deck
placement with the wireless carriers, thereby increasing the
likelihood that end users will purchase and play our games.
Global Scale in Distribution, Sales and
Marketing. We currently have agreements with
more than 150 wireless carriers and other distributors, which
together serve more than one billion subscribers worldwide. Our
games regularly receive premium placement on these
carriers’ game decks accessed through handset screens.
Given the small size of these screens, there are significant
advantages to being placed in the initial list of games that an
end user sees on the deck, rather than being placed lower on the
list where an end user may need to scroll or search to find a
game. In addition, we have developed closely integrated
technical and strategic relationships with many carriers. These
relationships typically are available to only a small number of
leading publishers and may result in access to carriers’
new handset models for porting and preloading games prior to
commercial handset release, self-certification of games with
carriers (rather than going through the carriers’ more
time-consuming processes for certifying compliance with their
network requirements), co-marketing and promotions for new game
releases, and end-user market research.
Strong Relationships with Branded Content
Owners. We have built relationships with a
number of key branded content owners. The content providers that
accounted for the largest percentages of our revenues in the
first nine months of 2006 were Atari, Celador (from which we
license the rights to Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? in
some European and Asian countries), Fox, PlayFirst, PopCap
Games, Sega Europe and Turner Broadcasting. In addition to these
relationships, we have recently licensed brands or other
intellectual property from Harrah’s, Hasbro, Microsoft and
Sony. We believe that branded content owners increasingly
understand the complexities of developing their own internal
mobile entertainment capabilities. In choosing mobile game
publishing partners, we believe that branded content owners wish
to work with publishers with a history of successfully
developing and publishing high-quality games, the carrier
relationships necessary to distribute their games on a worldwide
basis, the ability to do global marketing on a localized basis,
and independence from a parent that may compete with the content
owner in other markets. A number of carriers have reduced the
number of mobile game publishers to which they provide access to
their networks, and many branded content owners have similarly
narrowed the number of mobile game publishers with which they
contract. We believe these trends have mutually reinforced each
other to the benefit of leading publishers such as Glu.
Proprietary Porting and Data Mining
Capabilities. We have developed proprietary
technologies and processes designed to increase the
profitability of our games through rapid and cost-effective
porting to a broad range of handsets across a number of
carriers. Our porting capabilities leverage technology and
proprietary standardized processes, such as a development
process designed to facilitate efficient porting, a tool library
that helps automate some of the repetitive development tasks
to support new handsets, and ongoing work flow analysis tools to
support continuous improvement of our porting and deployment
capabilities. Porting and localization results in each game
having many stock keeping units, or SKUs, characterized by
title, language, handset and carrier. As of September 30,2006, we had the capability to port games to approximately
40,000 SKUs per month. Our data mining capabilities provide us
with the ability to analyze the revenue potential of each game
and to improve profitability by adjusting porting and marketing
support costs based upon the initial success of the game.
Together, our porting and data mining capabilities help us in
our efforts to increase initial and subsequent sales of each
game and to support continuing premium deck placement.
Experienced Management Team. In
addition to their experience in mobile games, our management
team has significant experience in the video game publishing,
wireless communications, technology and media industries. We
believe that this broad expertise allows us in a timely manner
to design, develop and deliver games and other mobile
entertainment applications that are designed to address the
demands of our market. We believe our management team’s
expertise and continuity is a significant competitive advantage
in the evolving mobile entertainment publishing market.
Our
Strategy
Our goal is to be the leading global publisher of mobile games
and other mobile entertainment applications. To achieve this
goal, we plan to:
Continue to Create Award-Winning Games through Ongoing
Investment in Our Studio and Technical Development
Capabilities. Our creative and technical
teams are recognized in the industry for creating high-quality,
award-winning mobile games. Our technical teams leverage
proprietary technologies and standardized automated processes
that are designed to enable rapid, timely, high-quality and
cost-effective development and porting of mobile games. We
believe that this combination provides us with a competitive
advantage over other industry participants that have
traditionally outsourced porting and development or used more
manual processes. As a result, we have a record of developing
successful mobile games based on licensed brands, as well as our
own original brands such as Super K.O. Boxing. Original
games result in higher margins, since we do not have to pay
royalties to a content licensor. The industry-leading quality of
our games, as recognized by industry reviewers is important to
our success, and we intend to continue investing in our
studio’s game development capabilities.
Leverage and Grow Our Portfolio of
Games. We have developed a diverse portfolio
of more than 100 games, including perennial titles that we
believe can produce revenues for significantly longer than the
typical 18 to 24 month revenue lifecycle for mobile games.
In addition, successful games give us the potential to develop
and publish a series of sequel titles, sometimes referred to as
franchise titles. For both perennial and sequel titles, we
leverage existing development, porting and marketing investments
and broad end-user awareness in order to increase the revenue
lifecycle of an existing game or increase the chance of success
for new games. Games for the mobile platform also provide
potential opportunities for us to publish or license our
intellectual property for use on other platforms such as online,
console or personal computer games. For example, casual games
are well suited for both online and mobile platforms, and we may
develop or license online versions of some of our casual games.
We plan to continue developing perennial and franchise titles,
and we believe that our proprietary technology and development
process capabilities provide us an advantage over our
competitors in the coordinated launches frequently required of
multi-platform games.
Expand and Strengthen Our
Distribution. We believe that wireless
carriers are increasing their focus on the leading mobile game
publishers in order to improve the consistency and quality of
the games that they offer on their handsets. However, among
carriers in the United States, the top seven publishers
currently account for only approximately 60% of mobile game
revenues, according to the September 2006 “Mobile Game
Track Highlight Report” of NPD Group, Inc., a market
research firm. We intend to take steps to increase our market
share with our existing carriers and distributors. For example,
we plan to leverage increased user awareness of Glu as a brand
that stands for high-
quality mobile entertainment through the use of Glu-branded game
menus on mobile handset decks. We also plan to seek additional
carrier relationships in geographic areas where we do not yet
have a significant presence. In addition, we have increased and
expect to continue to increase our non-carrier distribution
capabilities through alternative channels such as Internet
portals and “off-deck” aggregators.
Build Upon Our Position as a Leading Global Publisher to
Strengthen Licensing Relationships. We
believe that, as a leading independent publisher of mobile
games, we will continue to benefit from branded content
owners’ increasing recognition of the challenges associated
with mobile entertainment publishing. As a result of these
challenges, some branded content owners are reducing their own
internal mobile development efforts. We believe that branded
content owners are also becoming more reluctant to contract with
smaller mobile game publishers that do not have a reputation for
quality development or that do not have the breadth of carrier
relationships and technological capabilities necessary to
publish a game on a worldwide basis. We intend to capitalize on
these trends and on our reputation with non-mobile content
owners as a leading mobile partner to strengthen our existing
licensing relationships and develop additional relationships.
Gain Scale through Select
Acquisitions. We have acquired and integrated
two mobile game companies — Macrospace and iFone. We
believe that there may be future opportunities to acquire
content developers and publishers in the mobile entertainment or
complementary industries and we intend, where appropriate, to
take advantage of these opportunities.
Our
Products
We design our portfolio of games to appeal to the diverse
interests of the broad wireless subscriber population. We
believe that the quality of our games, as recognized by numerous
industry awards, is key to their repeated success. We focus on
developing a diverse portfolio of games across a number of
genres designed to increase adoption and repeat purchase rates
by subscribers. We also develop and publish ringtones and
wallpaper in coordination with a small number of our games, such
as Ice Age 2. Revenues from applications other than
games have not been material to date.
End users typically purchase our games from their wireless
carrier and are billed on their monthly phone bill. In the
United States, one-time fees for unlimited use generally range
between approximately $5.00 and $8.00, and prices for
subscriptions generally range between approximately $2.50 and
$3.50 per month, typically varying by game and carrier. In
Europe, our subscription prices have a similar range, while
one-time fees for unlimited use range both higher and lower,
depending on the country. Prices in the Asia-Pacific region are
generally lower than in the United States and Europe. Carriers
normally share with us 50% to 70% of their subscribers’
payments for our games, which we record as revenues. In the case
of games based on licensed brands, we, in turn, share with the
content licensor a portion of our revenues, with the specific
terms varying based on factors such as the strength of the
licensed brand.
Our portfolio of games includes original games based on our own
intellectual property and games based on brands and other
intellectual property licensed from branded content owners.
These latter games are inspired by non-mobile brands and
intellectual property, including movies, board games,
Internet-based casual games and console games. In the first nine
months of 2006, Glu-branded original games accounted for 15.0%
of our revenues. Games based on licensed content from Atari,
Fox, PopCap Games and Celador accounted for 23.6%, 17.3%, 11.6%
and 9.8%, respectively, of our revenues for this period, with
the balance coming from games and other applications based on
content from other branded content owners.
Our games typically generate revenues for 18 to 24 months
after release. As a result, we generate a significant portion of
our revenues from our current collection of games that have been
in release for more than 12 months, which we sometimes
refer to as our catalog.
The following table summarizes a selection of our games by genre:
Year
Target
Title
Branded Content
Owner
Introduced
Market
Action
Aqua Teen Hunger Force
Turner Broadcasting
2005*
Global
Driv3r and Driver
Vegas
Atari
2003/2005
Global
Inuyasha
Viz Media
2005
Regional
Sonic the Hedgehog
Part 1
Sega Europe
2006*
*
Regional
Board Game
Battleship
Hasbro
2006*
*
Global
Clue
Hasbro
2006*
*
Global
Game of Life
Hasbro
2006*
*
Global
Monopoly
Hasbro
2006*
*
Global
Card/Casino
5 Card Draw Poker
Glu
2004
Global
Blackjack Hustler
Glu
2005
Global
Hoyle Solitaire Pro
Encore Software
2006
Global
World Series of Poker Texas Hold
’em
Harrah’s
2006
Global
Puzzle
Astropop
PopCap Games
2005
Global
Diner Dash
PlayFirst
2006
Global
Insaniquarium Deluxe
PopCap Games
2006
Global
Zuma
PopCap Games
2005
Global
Sports
Deer Hunter and Deer Hunter
2
Atari
2004/2006
Global
FOX Sports Mobile
Fox
2003
Regional
Shark Hunt
Glu
2003
Global
Super K.O. Boxing
Glu
2006
Global
Strategy/RPG
Ancient Empires I and
II
Glu
2005*
Global
Baldur’s Gate
Hasbro
2004
Global
Kasparov Chess
Gary Kasparov
2006
Global
Stranded
Glu
2006
Global
TV/Movie
Ice Age 2
Fox
2006
Global
Mr. &
Mrs. Smith
Fox
2005
Global
Robots
Fox
2005
Global
Who Wants to Be a
Millionaire?
Celador
2005*
Regional
*
Title acquired from Macrospace in
December 2004 with first revenue for us in 2005.
**
Title acquired from iFone in March
2006 with first revenue for us in 2006.
Some of our newest games include the following:
Centipede. This game is based on the
Atari classic game and created for the mobile environment. This
game has players encounter tenacious centipedes, bouncing
spiders, mushroom-laying fleas and transforming scorpions as
with the popular original arcade game. Players choose from six
different themes, from recognizable Retro based on Atari’s
classic, to other new themes such as Robo, Water, Fire, Flower
and Contempo. The “Power Up” mode is designed to give
players new weapons such as missiles, bombs and lasers, and
precise, responsive controls.
Deer Hunter Mobile. Based on
Atari’s Deer Hunter franchise, Glu’s
award-winning Deer Hunter and its sequel, Deer Hunter
2 Mobile, are designed to give end users the most realistic
hunting game
available on mobile phones. Players take aim at multiple deer
species with a range of weapons in detailed environments. The
game allows players to utilize a GPS system to track deer and
choose their hunting location, attract deer with scents and
calls, use binoculars to spot the biggest bucks, tag them for
easy tracking, and use the “Steady Aim System” for
pinpoint accuracy. Players can hit the kill zone for one shot
take-downs and view an instant replay of the action. With
multiple modes of play, players can take either a quick hunt or
climb the hunters’ ranks in career mode.
Monopoly. Through our license with
Hasbro, we publish for mobile handsets this top-selling board
game in two versions: classic Monopoly and the all-new
Monopoly Here & Now. Up to four players can
play, choosing from eight tokens. Through buying, renting and
selling the 22 pieces of real estate on the board, players
compete to build their real estate empires, bankrupt their
opponents and stay out of jail in order to become the wealthiest
player.
Project Gotham Racing Mobile. Through
our relationship with Microsoft, we introduced 2- and
3-dimensional
mobile games based on Project Gotham Racing, the leading
action-oriented racing franchise on the Xbox 360 video game and
entertainment system. Microsoft markets Project Gotham Racing
as the ultimate test of racing where style is of the
essence. End users race seven types of vehicles including Aston
Martin, Lamborghini and Mercedes, with the game designed to
emulate each vehicle’s unique physics and engine
specifications, including top speed and horsepower, in order to
give an authentic driving experience. Players race through
locations including Paris, Cairo and Shanghai and progress
through a combination of fast lap performances, earning
“Kudos” points for driving with skill, style and
daring.
Super K.O. Boxing. This title is an
arcade-style boxing game for mobile handsets. Super K.O.
Boxing features arcade style boxing with animations,
cartoon-style graphics and
larger-than-life
characters. This Glu original game is designed to allow players
to punch their way through three circuits against outrageous
contenders with names such as Major Pain, 15 Cent and Sake Bomb
and learn each fighter’s weaknesses and fighting style,
while dodging and blocking to avoid going down for the count.
This game has been widely acclaimed, winning IGN’s
Editor’s Choice Award and WGWorld.com’s Editor’s
Award.
Changes in end-user tastes and advances in technology combined
with limitations on our ability to introduce additional versions
of games under many of our license agreements, even those with
durations longer than the typical shelf life of our games, mean
that we are frequently evaluating ideas for new potential games
and will need to obtain new licenses or develop new original
games on an ongoing basis. We may be unable to obtain new
licenses or to obtain them on terms favorable to us. Failure to
maintain or renew our existing licenses or to obtain additional
licenses could impair our ability to introduce new mobile games
or continue our current games, which could materially harm our
business, operating results and financial condition. Even if we
are successful in gaining new licenses or extending existing
licenses, we may fail to anticipate the entertainment
preferences of our end users when making choices about which
brands, titles or other content to license. If the entertainment
preferences of end users shift to content or brands owned or
developed by companies with which we do not have relationships,
we may be unable to establish and maintain successful
relationships with these developers and owners, which would
materially harm our business, operating results and financial
condition.
Sales, Marketing
and Distribution
We market and sell our games primarily through wireless
carriers. Because of our internal development, porting and
operations capabilities, we believe that we have a competitive
advantage over our competitors in the ability to execute
simultaneous and coordinated
“day-and-date”
launches. These typically include games associated with other
content platforms such as films, television and console games.
We also coordinate our marketing efforts with carriers and
mobile handset manufacturers in the launch of new games with new
handsets.
Our sales and marketing organization focuses on increasing
end-user awareness, adoption and repeat purchase rates through a
variety of programs. We co-market our games with our partners,
including carriers, branded content owners and
direct-to-consumer companies. For example, when we create an
idea for a game, we discuss the game with carriers early in the
development process to gain an understanding of the
attractiveness of the game to them, to obtain their other
feedback regarding the game, and to develop plans for
co-marketing and a potential launch strategy. We also coordinate
our marketing efforts with those of branded content owners,
especially where our games will be launched concurrently with
their film, television show or other entertainment product.
These programs leverage the sales and marketing resources of our
carriers and content licensors to amplify our own sales and
marketing efforts. In addition, we work with our carriers to
develop merchandising initiatives that stimulate trial and
purchase such as pre-loading of games on handsets, often with
free trials, Glu-branded game menus that offer games for trial
or sale, and
pay-per-play
or other alternative billing arrangements.
We believe that placement of games on the top level or featured
handset menu or toward the top of the genre-specific or other
menus, rather than lower down or in
sub-menus,
is likely to result in games achieving a greater degree of
commercial success. We believe that a number of factors may
influence the deck placement of a game including:
•
the perceived attractiveness of the title or brand;
•
past success of this title or other titles previously introduced
by a publisher;
•
the number of handsets for which a version of the game is
available;
•
the relationship with the applicable carrier;
•
the carrier’s economic incentives with respect to the
particular game, such as revenue split percentage; and
•
the level of marketing support, including marketing development
funds.
If carriers choose to give our games less favorable deck
placement, our games may be less successful than we anticipate
and our business, operating results and financial condition may
be materially harmed.
We currently have agreements with more than 150 carriers and
other distributors that in the aggregate reach more than one
billion subscribers. End users download our mobile games and
related applications to their mobile handsets, and typically
their carrier bills them a one-time fee or monthly subscription
fee, depending on the end user’s desired payment
arrangement and the carrier’s offering. Our carrier
distribution agreements establish the portion of revenues that
will be retained by the carrier for distributing our games and
other applications. Our carrier agreements do not establish us
as the exclusive provider of mobile games with the carriers and
typically have a term of one or two years with automatic renewal
provisions upon expiration of the initial term, absent a
contrary notice from either party. In addition, the carriers can
terminate these agreements early and, in some instances, without
cause. The agreements generally do not obligate the carriers to
market or distribute any of our games. In many of these
agreements, we warrant that our games do not contain libelous or
obscene content, do not contain material defects or viruses, and
do not violate third-party intellectual property rights and we
indemnify the carrier for any breach of a third party’s
intellectual property.
In the first nine months of 2006, Verizon Wireless, Sprint
Nextel, Cingular Wireless and Vodafone accounted for 20.9%,
12.0%, 11.4% and 10.7%, respectively, of our revenues. In 2005,
those carriers accounted for 24.3%, 11.5%, 11.9% and 6.2%,
respectively, of our revenues. Listed below are our ten largest
carriers by revenues (on an operating unit basis rather than a
globally or regionally
consolidated basis) in the nine months ended September 30,2006 for each of our four major geographical markets:
North
America
Europe
Verizon Wireless
Hutchinson 3G UK
Sprint Nextel
O2 UK
Cingular Wireless
Vodafone Germany
T-Mobile USA
Vodafone Spain
ALLTEL
Orange UK
Boost Mobile
Hutchinson 3G Italy
US Cellular
Vodafone UK
Bell Mobility
Vodafone France (SFR)
Rogers
Telefónica Móviles
Virgin
O2 Germany
Asia
Pacific
Latin
America
Hutchinson 3G Australia
TelCel
Vodafone Australia
Vivo - Telesp Celular SA
Telecom New Zealand
IUSACELL
Vodafone New Zealand
Telecomunicaciones Movilnet
Telstra
Verizon Wireless Puerto Rico
China Mobile
Centennial Puerto Rico
SKT
Telesp Celular SA
Optus Administration Pty Limited
nTelos
Smart
CODETEL
KTF
UNEFON
Although we intend to continue the primary distribution of our
games through carriers, we also sell and market our games
through our own website and various Internet portals. Currently,
revenues from these alternative distribution channels are
immaterial. However, we believe that they increase the exposure
of our games and brand to end users and that they may become
significant channels in the future. As with our carrier
distribution, we believe that inferior placement of our games in
the menus of off-deck distributors will result in lower revenues
than might otherwise be anticipated from these alternative sales
channels.
Studios
We have two internal studios that create and develop games and
other entertainment products tailored to mobile handsets. These
studios, based in San Mateo, California, and London,
England, have the ability to design and build products from
original intellectual property, based on games originated in
other media such as online and game consoles, or based on other
licensed brands and intellectual property.
Where we license intellectual property from films or other
brands or content not based on games from other media, our game
development process involves a significant amount of creativity.
Even licensed console or Internet games require more than a
simple port to the mobile environment; rather, our developers
must create games that are inspired by the game play of the
original. In each of these cases, our creative and technical
studio expertise is necessary to design games that appeal to end
users and work well on handsets with their inherent limitations
such as small screen sizes and control buttons.
In addition, our studios develop games with worldwide appeal
such as Ice Age 2 as well as games that are
regionally and culturally relevant like Deer Hunter. We
anticipate expanding our
creative and development team to include studios in Asia and
Latin America for localization and development of culturally
attuned games.
Product
Development and Technology
We have developed proprietary technologies and product
development processes that are designed to enable us rapidly and
cost effectively to develop and publish games that are
consistently rated as high quality by industry publications such
as IGN.com and WGWorld.com, and that meet the needs of our
wireless carriers. These technologies and processes include:
Development Platforms. Our development
platforms are designed to enable us to create high-quality games
that overcome the significant constraints of mobile handsets
while taking advantage of the inherent capabilities of networked
handsets. In addition, we have developed an infrastructure that
allows us to outsource the development of some games while
retaining the consistency of our development processes. This
provides us with a cost effective alternative for selected games.
Porting Tools and Processes. Unlike the
PC or console markets that have a relatively small number of
platforms, the heterogeneity of handsets creates substantial
complexity when publishing a game broadly. We have designed our
overall game development processes and tools to account for the
complexity of porting a game to over 1,000 handsets and over
10,000 SKUs. Furthermore, we have developed proprietary
software, tools and libraries that we believe provide us with an
advantage over our competitors by allowing us to port our games
to handsets quickly and at a significantly lower cost.
Broad Development Capabilities. We have
created development capabilities intended to exploit the full
range of the handset as an entertainment platform, including
single player games, client server applications such as FOX
Sports Mobile, turn-based two player games such as
Kasparov Chess, and real-time multi-player games such as
World Series of Poker.
Application Hosting, Provisioning and Billing
Capabilities. We have developed an
application hosting and provisioning system that integrates with
both carrier and third-party billing systems and allows for a
range of billing options designed to maximize the attractiveness
of games to end users with different payment preferences. For
example, we support
pay-per-play
and micro-billing, as well as the more traditional one-time and
subscription billing models. We believe that this system allows
us to deepen our relationships with our carriers and provides a
marketing opportunity by allowing for control of our own
merchandising.
Merchandising and Marketing
Platform. We have developed technologies to
enable innovative sales and marketing programs. For example, we
have developed innovative technologies that address the
historical challenges of marketing to end users within the
limits of the deck. Play free technologies allow us to push
games to an end user’s handset after he or she registers at
our website or at an Internet portal. We also create and host
WAP channels that enable Glu-branded storefronts, or menus, on a
carrier’s
e-commerce
system.
Thin Client-Server Platform. We have
invested in the technology infrastructure to develop and deploy
highly tailored non-browser based client-server applications.
This technology has allowed us to deploy entertainment products
like FOX Sports Mobile, which give consumers real-time
access to sports news and other information. This technology
could serve as a foundation for non-game entertainment products
we may deploy in the future.
Strategic
Relationships
The following are brief summaries of our major wireless carrier
and branded content owner relationships:
Verizon Wireless. We are party to a
BREW Application License Agreement with Cellco Partnership
(d.b.a. Verizon Wireless) dated February 12, 2002 and a
BREW Developer Agreement
with Qualcomm Inc. dated November 2, 2001, as amended,
under which we provide our games to Qualcomm, and Qualcomm in
turn distributes our games on the Verizon Wireless network
utilizing Qualcomm’s BREW technology. Under these
agreements, we set the wholesale price for each game, and for
each game sold, we retain a specified percentage of the
wholesale price. Verizon Wireless maintains control to set the
retail price. These agreements are terminable by either party
without cause with 30 days’ notice. We have similar
arrangements with other carriers that utilize Qualcomm’s
BREW technology.
Cingular Wireless and Vodafone. We are
party to a Wireless Information Service Licensing Agreement with
Cingular Wireless dated October 15, 2004 and our
wholly-owned subsidiary, Glu Mobile Limited, is a party to a
Master Reseller Agreement with Vodafone Global Content Services
Limited dated July 7, 2003, under which these carriers
function as resellers of our games and remit to us a specified
percentage of all revenues derived from the sale of our games to
their subscribers. In each case, the carrier maintains the right
to set the retail price. Cingular Wireless and Vodafone may
terminate their respective agreements with us for any reason
with 90 and 30 days’ notice, respectively. Under our
Cingular Wireless agreement, we have a joint marketing
commitment which guarantees that each quarter a specified number
of our games will be jointly marketed and will receive premium
deck placement.
Celador. Our wholly-owned subsidiary,
Glu Mobile Limited, is party to a Wireless Games Agreement with
Celador International Limited, dated December 8, 2004, as
amended, under which Celador grants to us the exclusive license
to create mobile games based on the Celador title Who
Wants To Be A Millionaire? on specified wireless platforms
in specified territories, primarily in Europe, but also in the
Asia-Pacific region. The agreement also grants us the right to
create mobile game versions of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?
where all the questions and answers included adhere to a
particular category or genre. We pay Celador a royalty of a
specified percentage of our net distributable revenues from
revenues arising from sales of the games, although this
percentage varies for sales through specified entities in
specified territories.
Fox. We are party to a Wireless Content
License Agreement with Fox Mobile Entertainment Inc., a division
of Fox Entertainment Group, Inc., dated December 16, 2004,
as amended, under which Fox grants to us the exclusive worldwide
license to create mobile games and applications based on such
Fox titles as Ice Age 2 and Kingdom of Heaven
on certain wireless platforms, and we grant to Fox a
non-exclusive license to sell these mobile games and
applications to Vodafone Group Services Limited and
T-Mobile,
for distribution to end users outside of the United States. For
the sale of our mobile games and applications based on the Fox
titles, we pay Fox a royalty of a specified percentage of our
receipts, which percentage varies based on the volume of our
sales and whether the film was a major release or a targeted
release. This agreement also provided for specified advances and
guaranties for some titles.
PopCap Games. We are party to a
Publishing and Distribution Agreement with PopCap Games, Inc.
and PopCap Games International, Ltd., dated October 1,2004, as amended, under which PopCap Games grants to us the
exclusive worldwide license to create mobile games based on
PopCap Games’ titles on specified wireless platforms. We
pay PopCap Games a royalty on sales of the mobile games equal to
the greater of a specified percentage of our revenues from these
sales or a specified fixed amount per unit sold, with the
percentages and amounts varying for one-time download sales and
subscription sales. PopCap Games may terminate the agreement
with regard to any game that we publish and distribute under
this agreement if we do not meet specified quarterly royalty
targets for that game.
Competition
Our primary competitors include Digital Chocolate, Electronic
Arts (EA Mobile), Gameloft, Hands-On Mobile, I-play, Namco and
THQ. In the future, likely competitors include major media
companies, traditional video game publishers, content
aggregators, mobile software providers and
independent mobile game publishers. Wireless carriers may also
decide to develop, internally or through a managed third-party
developer, and distribute their own mobile games. If carriers
enter the mobile game market as publishers, they might refuse to
distribute some or all of our games or might deny us access to
all or part of their networks.
The development, distribution and sale of mobile games is a
highly competitive business. For end users, we compete primarily
on the basis of brand, game quality and price. For wireless
carriers, we compete for deck placement based on these factors,
as well as historical performance and perception of sales
potential and relationships with licensors of brands and other
intellectual property. For licensors, we compete based on
royalty and other economic terms, perceptions of development
quality, porting abilities, speed of execution, distribution
breadth and relationships with carriers. We also compete for
experienced and talented employees.
Some of our competitors’ and our potential
competitors’ advantages over us, either globally or in
particular geographic markets, include the following:
•
significantly greater revenues and financial resources;
•
stronger brand and consumer recognition;
•
the capacity to leverage their marketing expenditures across a
broader portfolio of mobile and non-mobile products;
•
pre-existing relationships with brand owners or carriers;
•
greater resources to make acquisitions;
•
lower labor and development costs; and
•
broader distribution.
Further, our capital resources limit the number of games that we
can develop and market, and any inability to predict
successfully the appropriate level of marketing investment in
each game could result in lower earnings than we anticipate.
Electronic Arts (EA Mobile) and Gameloft are expending
significant amounts to promote the introduction of a large
number of games in Europe in the fourth calendar quarter of
2006. The success of these marketing efforts and the volume of
games involved may result in less desirable placement, or no
placement, on the decks of some carriers for the new games that
we plan to introduce, and, irrespective of deck placement, may
result in greater sales of their games to end users and,
consequently, lower sales of our games.
Intellectual
Property
Our intellectual property is an essential element of our
business. We use a combination of trademark, copyright, trade
secret and other intellectual property laws, confidentiality
agreements and license agreements to protect our intellectual
property. Our employees and independent contractors are required
to sign agreements acknowledging that all inventions, trade
secrets, works of authorship, developments and other processes
generated by them on our behalf are our property, and assigning
to us any ownership that they may claim in those works. Despite
our precautions, it may be possible for third parties to obtain
and use without consent intellectual property that we own or
license. Unauthorized use of our intellectual property by third
parties, and the expenses incurred in protecting our
intellectual property rights, may adversely affect our business.
We are the owner of six trademarks registered with the
U.S. Patent and Trademark office, including Alpha
Wing, and have six trademark applications pending with the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including Glu, our
‘g’ character logo, Ancient Empires and
Super K.O. Boxing. We also own one or more registered
trademarks in Australia, Chile, the European Union, Mexico, New
Zealand and the United Kingdom, including the names Alpha
Wing, Ancient Empires and our ‘g’
character logo, and have a number of trademark applications
pending in more than 20 other jurisdictions for the same and
other trademarks. Registration of both U.S. and foreign
trademarks are renewable every ten years.
In addition, many of our games and other applications are based
on or incorporate intellectual property that we license from
third parties. We have both exclusive and non-exclusive licenses
to use these properties for terms that generally range from two
to five years. Our licensed brands include, among others,
Deer Hunter, Diner Dash, Monopoly, Sonic the Hedgehog, Who
Wants To Be A Millionaire? and Zuma. Our licensors
include a number of well-established video game publishers and
major media companies, including Atari, Celador, Fox,
Harrah’s, Hasbro, Microsoft, PlayFirst, PopCap Games, Sega
Europe, Sony and Turner Broadcasting. In the first nine months
of 2006, revenues derived from our games and other applications
based on the brands and other intellectual property of our four
largest licensors, Atari, Fox, PopCap Games and Celador,
represented 23.6%, 17.3% 11.6% and 9.8% of our revenues in the
first nine months of 2006.
From time to time, we may encounter disputes over rights and
obligations concerning intellectual property. Although we
believe that our product offerings do not infringe the
intellectual property rights of any third party, we cannot be
certain that we will prevail in any intellectual property
dispute. If we do not prevail in these disputes, we may lose
some or all of our intellectual property protection, be enjoined
from further sales of our games or other applications determined
to infringe the rights of others,
and/or be
forced to pay substantial royalties to a third party, any of
which would have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Employees
As of September 30, 2006, we had 226 employees, including
140 in research and product development. Of these employees, 123
were in the United States, 96 were in Europe and 7 were in Hong
Kong. None of our employees is represented by a labor union or
is covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We have never
experienced any employment-related work stoppages and consider
relations with our employees to be good.
Facilities
We lease approximately 37,048 square feet in
San Mateo, California for our corporate headquarters,
including our operations, studio and research and development
facilities, pursuant to a lease agreement that expires in March
2008. We have an option to extend the lease for three years and
a right of first refusal to lease additional space in our
building. In addition, we intend to enter into a lease for
approximately 10,600 square feet in London, England for our
principal European offices with an expected expiration date of
October 2012. We anticipate having an option to extend the
London lease for five years and a right of first refusal to
lease additional space in that building. We also lease
properties in Brazil, France, Germany and Hong Kong. We believe
our space is adequate for our current needs and that suitable
additional or substitute space will be available to accommodate
the foreseeable expansion of our operations.
Legal
Proceedings
From time to time, we may be subject to legal proceedings and
claims in the ordinary course of business. We are not currently
a party to any material legal proceedings, and to our knowledge
none is threatened.
The following table provides information regarding our executive
officers and directors as of December 15, 2006:
Name
Age
Position(s)
Executive Officers:
L. Gregory Ballard
53
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Director
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel
51
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
Jill S. Braff
37
Senior Vice President of Worldwide
Marketing and
General Manager of the Americas
Alessandro Galvagni
36
Senior Vice President of Product
Development and
Chief Technology Officer
Kristian Segerstråle
29
Managing Director, EMEA
Other Directors:
Daniel L. Skaff
46
Lead Independent Director
Ann Mather(1)
46
Director
Richard A. Moran(2)
56
Director
Hany M. Nada(1)
37
Director
A. Brooke Seawell(1)(3)
58
Director
Sharon L. Wienbar(2)(3)
44
Director
Key Employees:
Kevin S. Chou
34
Vice President and General Counsel
Denis M. Guyennot
43
Chief Executive Officer, EMEA
Eric R. Ludwig
37
Vice President, Finance
(1)
Member of our Audit Committee.
(2)
Member of our Compensation Committee.
(3)
Member of our Nominating and Governance Committee.
L. Gregory Ballard has served as our President,
Chief Executive Officer and director since September 2003. Prior
to joining us, Mr. Ballard consulted for Virgin USA, Inc.
from April 2003 to September 2003. Prior to then, he served as
Chief Executive Officer at SONICblue Incorporated, a
manufacturer of ReplayTV digital video recorders and Rio digital
music players, from August 2002 to April 2003, and as Executive
Vice President of Marketing and Product Management at SONICblue
from April 2002 to August 2002. Between July 2001 and April
2002, Mr. Ballard worked as a consultant. Mr. Ballard
served as Chief Executive Officer of MyFamily.com, Inc., a
subscription-based Internet service, from January 2000 to July
2001. Previously, he served as Chief Executive Officer or in
another senior executive capacity with 3dfx Interactive, Inc.,
an advanced graphics chip manufacturer, Warner Custom Music
Corp., a division of Time Warner, Inc., Capcom Entertainment,
Inc., a developer and publisher of video games, and Digital
Pictures, Inc., a video game developer and publisher.
Mr. Ballard holds a B.A. degree in political science from
the University of Redlands and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.
Albert A. “Rocky” Pimentel has served as our
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since
October 2004. Prior to joining us, Mr. Pimentel served as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Zone
Labs, Inc., an end-point security software company, from
September 2003 until it was acquired in April 2004 by Checkpoint
Software, Inc. From January 2001 to June 2003, he served as a
Partner of Redpoint Ventures, a venture capital firm focused on
investments in information technology. Prior to then, he served
as Chief Financial Officer for WebTV Networks, Inc., a provider
of set-top Internet access devices and services acquired by
Microsoft Corporation, and LSI
Logic Corporation, a semiconductor and storage systems developer
listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Mr. Pimentel holds a
B.S. in commerce from Santa Clara University and is a
Certified Public Accountant.
Jill S. Braff has served as our Senior Vice President of
Worldwide Marketing since May 2005 and also as our General
Manager of the Americas since August 2005. She also previously
served as our Vice President of Marketing from December 2003 to
May 2004, and as a marketing consultant from November 2003 to
December 2003. From 2001 until November 2003, Ms. Braff
worked as an independent marketing consultant and functioned as
interim Vice President of Marketing at Sega of America, Inc., an
interactive entertainment company, from June 2003 to August
2003, as Creative Director at Konami of America, an electronic
entertainment company, from January 2003 to June 2003, and as a
wireless games consultant at Sprint PCS from January 2002 to
April 2002. Ms. Braff has also held senior marketing
positions at Photopoint Corporation, MyFamily.com, Inc. and The
Learning Company. Ms. Braff holds a B.A. in English from
Colgate University.
Alessandro Galvagni has served as our Chief Technology
Officer since September 2002 and also as our Senior Vice
President of Product Development since January 2006. Prior to
joining us, Mr. Galvagni served as an architect (pervasive
division) at BEA Systems, Inc. during 2001. Previously,
Mr. Galvagni served as project leader at Pumatech
International, a mobile software technology company, from 1999
to 2001. Prior to then, Mr. Galvagni served in senior
engineering roles with Proxinet, Inc., a mobile software
technology company, and at NASA Ames Research Center.
Mr. Galvagni holds a B.S. in computer engineering from
California State University at San Jose and an M.S. in
computer engineering from Santa Clara University.
Kristian Segerstråle has served as our Managing
Director, EMEA, since December 2005, and served as our Vice
President, Production, EMEA from December 2004 to December 2005.
In August 2001, Mr. Segerstråle co-founded Macrospace,
a mobile games developer and publisher, where he served as
Director and Head of Products and Services until we acquired
Macrospace in December 2004. Mr Segerstråle holds a B.A.
Hons (M.A. Cantab) in economics from Cambridge University and an
M.Sc. from London School of Economics.
Daniel L. Skaff has served on our board of directors
since December 2001 and has served as our lead independent
director since June 2005. Mr. Skaff is the founder of
Sienna Ventures, a venture capital firm, and has served as its
Managing Partner since its inception in June 2000. He also
co-founded
Pon North America Inc., a distribution company, and served as
its Chairman from May 1998 to May 2001. Mr. Skaff also is a
founding investor and lead director of Protocol Communications
Inc., a call center and integrated marketing services business,
where he served as a director from June 1998 to December 1999.
He is currently on the investment committee of the Marin
Community Foundation, a large charitable organization, and is a
founding advisory board member of Northstar Capital LLC, a
subordinated debt fund based in Minneapolis. Mr. Skaff also
serves on the boards of directors of EBT Mobile China, Plc,
Epana Networks, Inc., and Viaquo Corp. Mr. Skaff holds an
A.B. in economics with honors from Harvard University and an
M.B.A. from the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania,
where he was a Wharton Fellow.
Ann Mather has served on our board of directors since
September 2005. From September 1999 to May 2004, Ms. Mather
was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for
Pixar Animation Studios Inc. From 1992 to July 1999 she held
various executive positions at The Walt Disney Company,
including Senior Vice President of Finance and Administration
for its Buena Vista International Theatrical Division. Prior to
then, she served in various roles with Alico, a division of AIG,
Inc., Polo Ralph Lauren Europe’s retail operations,
Paramount Pictures Corporation and KPMG in London.
Ms. Mather also serves on the boards of directors of Google
Inc., where she is chair of its audit committee, Central
European Media Enterprises Ltd., where she is on its audit and
compensation committees, Ariat International, Inc and
Zappos.com, Inc. She also served as a director of Shopping.com
from May 2004 until it was acquired by Ebay in 2005, where she
was chair of its audit committee and a member of its corporate
governance and nominating committee. Ms. Mather holds
an M.A. from Cambridge University in England and is qualified as
a Chartered Accountant in England and Wales.
Richard A. Moran has served on our board of directors
since May 2002. He served as Chairman of the Board of Directors
of Portal Software, Inc. from February 2003 until Portal was
sold to Oracle Corporation in July 2006. Also, since January
2002, he has served as Chief Executive Officer of Moran Manor
and Vineyards LLC. From April 1996 to May 2002, Mr. Moran
served as Partner at Accenture Inc. (formerly Anderson
Consulting LLP), focusing on media and entertainment. He also
serves on the boards of directors of Sutura, Inc. and the
National Association of Corporate Directors, Northern California
Chapter. Mr. Moran is the author of several books on
business and management. Mr. Moran holds a B.A. in English
from Rutgers College, an M.A. in personnel administration from
Indiana University and a Ph.D. in organizational behavior/higher
education from Miami University (Ohio).
Hany M. Nada has served on our board of directors since
April 2005. Mr. Nada co-founded Granite Global Ventures in
2000 and has served as a Managing Director since its inception.
He has also served as Managing Director and Senior Research
Analyst at Piper Jaffray & Co., specializing in
Internet software and e-infrastructure. Mr. Nada also
serves on the boards of directors of OneWave
Technologies, Inc., Accruent, Inc., Vocera
Communications, Inc., WildTangent, Inc., and Endeca
Technologies, Inc. Mr. Nada holds a B.S. in economics
and a B.A. in political science from the University of Minnesota.
A. Brooke Seawell has served on our board of
directors since June 2006. Since January 2005, Mr. Seawell
has served as a Venture Partner at New Enterprise Associates,
focusing on software and semiconductor investments. From
February 2000 to December 2004, he served as a Partner at
Technology Crossover Ventures. Prior to joining TCV,
Mr. Seawell worked in senior executive positions with
NetDynamics, Inc., an application server software company, and
Synopsys Inc., an electronic design automation software company.
Mr. Seawell also serves on the boards of directors of
NVIDIA Corporation, Informatica Corporation, CoWare, Inc., iRise
Corporation and SiTime Corporation. Mr. Seawell holds a
B.A. in economics from Stanford University and an M.B.A. from
the Stanford Graduate School of Business.
Sharon L. Wienbar has served on our board of directors
since June 2004. Since 2001, Ms. Wienbar has served first
as a Director and later as a Managing Director at BA Venture
Partners, focusing on software investments, including media and
Internet companies. From 1999 to 2000, she served as Vice
President, Marketing at Amplitude Software Corp., a provider of
Internet resource scheduling solutions, and then at Critical
Path, Inc., a software-as-a-service company that acquired
Amplitude. Prior to then, she worked in product marketing at
Adobe Systems and practiced strategy consulting at
Bain & Company. Ms. Wienbar also serves on the
boards of directors of Bellamax, Inc., Biz360, Inc., FaceTime
Communications, Inc., Reply! Inc. and WYBS, Inc. (doing business
as MerchantCircle). Ms. Wienbar holds a A.B. in engineering
from Harvard University, a M.A. in engineering from Harvard
University and an M.B.A. from the Stanford Graduate School of
Business.
Kevin S. Chou has served as our Vice President and
General Counsel since July 2006. Prior to joining us,
Mr. Chou served as Senior Counsel at Knight-Ridder, Inc., a
newspaper publishing and Internet company, from August 2005 to
July 2006. From September 2002 to August 2005, he served as
Associate General Counsel at The Thomas Kinkade Company, an art
publishing company. Mr. Chou served as General Counsel of
Dialpad Communications, Inc., an Internet telephony company,
from October 2000 to March 2002. Previously, Mr. Chou
worked at Fenwick & West LLP, a law firm serving
technology and life sciences clients. Mr. Chou holds a B.S.
in economics from the University of California at Berkeley and a
J.D. from Yale Law School.
Denis M. Guyennot has served as the Chief Executive
Officer, EMEA since March 2006. Prior to joining us,
Mr. Guyennot served as Executive Vice President of the
wireless division of Infogrames Entertainment S.A., a video game
company, from October 2004 to March 2006, President and Chief
Operating Officer of Atari, Inc., a video game company, from
April 2000 to September 2004, and
President of Distribution for Infogrames Entertainment Europe,
from January 1999 to January 2000. From July 1998 to January
1999, Mr. Guyennot served as President of Infogrames
Europe’s Southern Region. Mr. Guyennot has been a
director of Atari, Inc. since January 2000 and is also currently
a director of Boonty Inc. Mr. Guyennot attended the
University of Lyon.
Eric R. Ludwig has served as our Vice President, Finance
since April 2005, and served as our Director of Finance from
January 2005 to April 2005. Prior to joining us, from January
1996 to January 2005, Mr. Ludwig held various positions at
Instill Corporation, an on-demand supply chain software company,
most recently as Chief Financial Officer, Vice President,
Finance and Corporate Secretary. Prior to Instill,
Mr. Ludwig was Corporate Controller at Camstar Systems,
Inc., an enterprise manufacturing execution and quality systems
software company, from May 1994 to January 1996. He also worked
at Price Waterhouse L.L.P. from May 1989 to May 1994.
Mr. Ludwig holds a B.S. in commerce from Santa Clara
University and is a Certified Public Accountant.
Board of
Directors Composition
Under our restated bylaws that will become effective immediately
following the completion of this offering, our board of
directors may set the authorized number of directors. While our
board of directors currently consists of ten authorized members,
our board of directors intends to reduce the number of
authorized directors to seven prior to completion of this
offering. Each director currently serves until our next annual
meeting or until his or her successor is duly elected and
qualified. Upon the completion of this offering, our common
stock will be listed on The NASDAQ Global Market. The rules of
The NASDAQ Stock Market require that a majority of the members
of our board of directors be independent within specified
periods following the completion of this offering. We believe
that six of our directors are independent as determined under
the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market: Messrs. Skaff, Moran,
Nada and Seawell, and Mses. Mather and Wienbar. In June 2005,
our board of directors designated Daniel L. Skaff as our lead
independent director.
Pursuant to a voting agreement entered into in March 29,2006, Messrs. Barry J. Schiffman, Skaff, Seawell, Nada,
Andrew T. Heller and David C. Ward, and Ms. Wienbar were
designated to serve as members of our board of directors.
Pursuant to the voting agreement, Messrs. Seawell and Skaff
were selected as the representatives of our Series A
Preferred Stock, Mr. Schiffman was selected as the
representative of our Series B Preferred Stock,
Ms. Wienbar was selected as the representative of our
Series C Preferred Stock, Messrs. Nada and Heller were
selected as the representatives of our Series D and
Series D-1
Preferred Stock, Mr. Ward was selected as the
representative of our Special Junior Preferred Stock and
Messrs. Ballard and Moran and Ms. Mather were selected
by all of the holders of our preferred and common stock. As of
the date of this prospectus, Messrs. Nada, Skaff and
Seawell and Ms. Wienbar continue to serve on our board of
directors and will continue to serve as directors until their
resignation or until their successors are duly elected by the
holders of our common stock, despite the fact that the voting
agreement will terminate upon the completion of this offering.
Immediately following the completion of this offering, we will
file our restated certificate of incorporation. We anticipate
that the restated certificate of incorporation will divide our
board of directors into three classes, with staggered three-year
terms:
•
Class I directors, whose initial term will expire at the
annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2008;
•
Class II directors, whose initial term will expire at the
annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2009; and
•
Class III directors, whose initial term will expire at the
annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2010.
At each annual meeting of stockholders after the initial
classification, the successors to directors whose terms have
expired will be elected to serve from the time of election and
qualification until the
third annual meeting following election. Upon the completion of
this offering, the Class I directors will consist of
Messrs. Moran and Nada and Ms. Wienbar; the
Class II directors will consist Ms. Mather and
Mr. Skaff; and the Class III directors will consist of
Messrs. Ballard and Seawell. As a result, only one class of
directors will be elected at each annual meeting of our
stockholders, with the other classes continuing for the
remainder of their respective three-year terms.
In addition, we intend to restate our bylaws upon the completion
of this offering to provide that only our board of directors may
fill vacancies on our board of directors until the next annual
meeting of stockholders. Any additional directorships resulting
from an increase in the number of directors will be distributed
among the three classes so that, as nearly as possible, each
class will consist of one-third of the total number of directors.
This classification of our board of directors and the provisions
described above may have the effect of delaying or preventing
changes in our control or management. See “Description of
Capital Stock — Anti-Takeover Provisions —
Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Restated Bylaw
Provisions.”
Committees of Our
Board of Directors
Our board of directors has established an audit committee, a
compensation committee and a nominating and governance
committee. The composition and responsibilities of each
committee are described below. Members serve on these committees
until their resignations or until otherwise determined by our
board of directors.
Audit
Committee
Our audit committee is comprised of Ms. Mather, who is the
chair of the audit committee, and Messrs. Nada and Seawell.
The composition of our audit committee meets the requirements
for independence under the current NASDAQ Stock Market and SEC
rules and regulations, including their transitional rules. Each
member of our audit committee is financially literate. In
addition, our audit committee includes a financial expert within
the meaning of Item 401(h) of
Regulation S-K
promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities
Act. All audit services to be provided to us and all permissible
non-audit services, other than de minimis non-audit services, to
be provided to us by our independent registered public
accounting firm will be approved in advance by our audit
committee. Our audit committee recommended, and our board of
directors has adopted, an amended and restated charter for our
audit committee, which will be posted on our website. Our audit
committee, among other things:
•
selects a firm to serve as independent registered public
accounting firm to audit our financial statements;
•
helps to ensure the independence of the independent registered
public accounting firm;
•
discusses the scope and results of the audit with the
independent registered public accounting firm, and reviews, with
management and that firm, our interim and year-end operating
results;
•
develops procedures for employees to submit anonymously concerns
about questionable accounting or audit matters;
•
considers the adequacy of our internal accounting controls and
audit procedures; and
•
approves or, as permitted, pre-approves all audit and non-audit
services to be performed by the independent registered public
accounting firm.
Compensation
Committee
Our compensation committee is comprised of Mr. Moran, who
is the chair of the compensation committee, and
Ms. Wienbar. The composition of our compensation committee
meets the
requirements for independence under the current NASDAQ Stock
Market and SEC rules and regulations. The purpose of our
compensation committee is to discharge the responsibilities of
our board of directors relating to compensation of our executive
officers. Our compensation committee recommended, and our board
of directors has adopted, an amended and restated charter for
our compensation committee. Our compensation committee, among
other things:
•
reviews and determines the compensation of our executive
officers;
•
administers our stock and equity incentive plans;
•
reviews and makes recommendations to our board of directors with
respect to incentive compensation and equity plans; and
•
establishes and reviews general policies relating to
compensation and benefits of our employees.
Nominating and
Governance Committee
We currently have a nominating and governance committee
comprised of Ms. Wienbar, who is the chair of the
nominating and governance committee, and Mr. Seawell. Upon
completion of this offering, our board of directors will have a
nominating and governance committee consisting of two directors.
The composition of our nominating and governance committee will
meet the requirements for independence under the current NASDAQ
Stock Market and SEC rules and regulations. Our nominating and
governance committee recommended, and our board of directors has
adopted, an amended and restated charter for our nominating and
governance committee. Our nominating and governance committee,
among other things:
•
identifies, evaluates and recommends nominees to our board of
directors and committees of our board of directors;
•
conducts searches for appropriate directors;
•
evaluates the performance of our board of directors;
•
considers and makes recommendations to our board of directors
regarding the composition of our board of directors and its
committees;
•
reviews related party transactions and proposed waivers of the
code of conduct;
•
reviews developments in corporate governance practices;
•
evaluates the adequacy of our corporate governance practices and
reporting; and
•
makes recommendations to our board of directors concerning
corporate governance matters.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Since January 1, 2005, the following directors and former
directors have at one time been members of our compensation
committee: Ms. Wienbar, Mr. Moran, Stewart J. O.
Alsop II (resigned from our board of directors effective
June 6, 2006) and Jon D. Callaghan (resigned from our
board of directors effective February 2, 2006). None of
them has at any time been one of our officers or employees. None
of our executive officers serves or in the past has served as a
member of our board of directors or compensation committee of
any entity that has one or more of its executive officers
serving on our board of directors or our compensation committee.
In September 2004, Mr. Ballard and his spouse agreed to
purchase a home in Redwood City, California from Mr. Alsop,
who was then a member of our board of directors and compensation
committee, and his spouse. The Alsops had recently listed the
house on the local multiple listing service, but
Mr. Ballard learned directly from Mr. Alsop that it
was for sale. Through a real estate agent, Mr. Ballard and
his spouse initially offered to purchase the home at the listed
asking price of $3.0 million. Mr. Alsop and his spouse
counter-offered to sell the house for $3.1 million, and
Mr. Ballard
and his spouse agreed. In connection with the arrangement of the
mortgage, the home was appraised at $3.1 million. The sale
was completed in December 2004. The other members of our
compensation committee were aware of the transaction at the time
of discussing Mr. Ballard’s compensation.
Director
Compensation
The following table provides information for 2006 regarding all
plan and non-plan compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to
each person who served as a director for some portion or all of
2006. Other than as set forth in the table and described more
fully below, in 2006, we did not pay any fees to, reimburse any
expenses of, make any equity or non-equity awards to or pay any
other compensation to our non-employee directors. All
compensation that we paid to Mr. Ballard, our only employee
director, is set forth in the tables summarizing executive
officer compensation below.
2006
Names
Option
Awards(1)
Amy N. Francetic(2)
—
Ann Mather(3)
$
6,930
Richard A. Moran(4)
36,621
(1)
The amounts in this column represent the aggregate grant date
fair value, computed in accordance with SFAS No. 123R,
of all options granted to the named director in 2006. See
note 12 of the notes to our consolidated financial
statements for a discussion of all assumptions made in
determining the grant date fair values.
(2)
We initially granted Ms. Francetic an option to purchase
10,000 shares of our common stock, with an exercise price
of $0.06 per share, in August 2002 for serving on our
advisory board; this option vested over two years and
became fully vested in August 2004. We appointed
Ms. Francetic to our board of directors in June 2004 and,
at that time, we granted her an option to purchase
75,000 shares of our common stock with an exercise price of
$0.25 per share. The option vested over four years with a
schedule similar to that described in footnote (3), but,
when Ms. Francetic resigned from our board of directors in
March 2006, we accelerated the vesting of all her options that
remained unvested at that time. Ms. Francetic exercised
both options in full on June 2006. In 2006, we reimbursed an
aggregate of $1,627 of Ms. Francetic’s travel expenses
in connection with attendance at the meetings of our board of
directors in late 2005 and early 2006.
(3)
In September 2005, we granted Ms. Mather an option to
purchase 150,000 shares of our common stock. We also
granted Ms. Mather an option to purchase 75,000 shares
of our common stock in February 2006. Each of these options:
(i) vests as to 1/4 of the shares of common stock
underlying it on the first anniversary of its grant date and as
to 1/48 of the shares of common stock underlying it monthly
thereafter; (ii) is immediately exercisable;
(iii) contains change of control provisions such that all
unvested shares vest immediately upon the closing of a change of
control transaction, as defined in the 2001 Stock Option Plan;
and (iv) has an exercise price of $1.19. Both of these
options remained outstanding at December 19, 2006. The
grant to Ms. Mather from September 2005 originally had an
exercise price of $1.60 per share; in March 2006, in order
to maintain the retentive and incentive value of
Ms. Mather’s stock options and to align her stock
option exercise price with that of Mr. Moran, our other director
not affiliated with a principal stockholder, our board of
directors elected to reprice Ms. Mather’s September
2005 option at $1.19 per share, which is not less than the
$1.09 fair market value of our common stock based upon a
valuation report as of December 31, 2005, and $1.19 based
upon a valuation report as of March 31, 2006, both from an
independent valuation firm. For a discussion of the valuation of
our common stock, please see “— Executive
Compensation — Compensation Discussion and
Analysis — Equity Compensation” below. The
aggregate incremental fair value, computed in accordance with
SFAS No. 123R, of this option as of the date that it
was repriced was $6,930. See note 12 of the notes to our
consolidated financial statements for a discussion of all
assumptions made in determining the grant date fair values.
In June 2002, we granted Mr. Moran two options, each to
purchase 50,000 shares of our common stock. We granted one
option for his work as a consultant and the other for joining
our board of directors. Each of these options vested as to 1/4
of the shares of common stock underlying it on the first
anniversary of its grant date and as to 1/48 of the shares of
common stock underlying it monthly thereafter, and had an
exercise price of $0.06 per share. In May 2003, we granted
Mr. Moran an option to purchase 80,000 shares of our
common stock, with an exercise price of $0.06 per share,
that vests over a four-year period; our board of directors
determined that the May 2003 grant should vest concurrently with
the options granted in June 2002. In each case, the exercise
price was equal to the fair market value of our common stock as
determined by our board of directors on the grant date.
Mr. Moran exercised these three options and purchased
180,000 shares of our common stock in December 2004. In February
2006, we granted Mr. Moran an additional option to purchase
45,000 shares of our common stock. This option
(i) vests as to 1/4 of the shares of common stock
underlying it on the first anniversary of its grant date and as
to 1/48 of the shares of common stock underlying it each month
thereafter; (ii) is immediately exercisable;
(iii) contains a change of control provision such that all
unvested shares vest immediately upon the closing of a change of
control transaction, as defined in the 2001 Stock Option Plan;
and (iv) has an exercise price of $1.19, which is not less
than the $1.09 fair market value of our common stock based
upon a valuation report as of December 31, 2005, and $1.19
based upon a valuation report as of March 31, 2006, both
from an independent valuation firm. For a discussion of the
valuation of our common stock, please see
“— Executive
Compensation — Compensation Discussion and
Analysis — Equity Compensation” below.
Following the completion of this offering, we intend to
compensate our non-employee directors with a combination of cash
and equity. Each non-employee director will receive an annual
base compensation of $20,000, provided that, until our first
annual meeting of stockholders following the completion of this
offering, directors who are affiliated with one of our principal
stockholders will not be eligible for this annual base
compensation. Our lead independent director, the chairperson of
our audit committee and the chairperson of our compensation
committee will receive additional annual compensation of
$15,000, and the chairperson of our nominating and governance
committee will receive additional annual cash compensation of
$5,000. Each director will receive additional annual cash
compensation of $5,000 for service on each of the committees
described above other than as chairperson. All this cash
compensation will be paid in quarterly installments upon
continuing service. Further, upon completion of this offering,
each non-employee director, other than Ms. Mather and
Mr. Moran who have previously received an initial equity
compensation award and consequently will receive smaller awards,
will receive an initial equity award of, at that director’s
discretion, either an option to purchase 100,000 shares of
our common stock or a grant of 33,000 shares of restricted
stock, which in either case will vest as to
162/3%
of the shares after six months and thereafter will vest pro rata
monthly for the next 30 months. Ms. Mather and
Mr. Moran will have a choice of either an option to
purchase 33,000 shares or a grant of 11,000 shares of
restricted stock, which vest as to 50% of the shares after six
months and thereafter will vest pro rata monthly for the next
six months. Each year at about the time of our annual meeting of
stockholders, each non-employee director will receive an
additional equity award of, at that director’s discretion,
either a grant of a number of shares of restricted stock with a
then fair market value equal to $50,000 or an option to purchase
three times as many shares of our common stock, in either case
vesting pro rata monthly over one year. We intend to provide
equity compensation to new non-employee directors in initial and
annual amounts with similar dollar values.
Executive
Compensation
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
This section discusses the principles underlying our executive
compensation policies and decisions and the most important
factors relevant to an analysis of these policies and decisions.
It provides qualitative information regarding the manner and
context in which compensation is awarded
to and earned by our executive officers and places in
perspective the data presented in the tables and narrative that
follow.
Our compensation program for executive officers is designed to
attract, as needed, individuals with the skills necessary for us
to achieve our business plan, to motivate those individuals, to
reward those individuals fairly over time, and to retain those
individuals who continue to perform at or above the levels that
we expect. It is also designed to reinforce a sense of
ownership, urgency and overall entrepreneurial spirit and to
link rewards to measurable corporate and individual performance.
Our executive officers’ compensation currently has three
primary components — base compensation or salary,
quarterly (and, in the case of Mr. Ballard, our Chief
Executive Officer, also annual) cash bonuses under a
performance-based, non-equity incentive plan, and stock option
awards granted pursuant to our 2001 Stock Option Plan, which is
described below under “— Employee Benefit
Plans.” In addition, we provide our executive officers a
variety of benefits that are available generally to all salaried
employees in the geographical location where they are based. We
fix executive officer base compensation at a level we believe
enables us to hire and retain individuals in a competitive
environment and to reward satisfactory individual performance
and a satisfactory level of contribution to our overall business
goals. We also take into account the base compensation that is
payable by companies that we believe to be our competitors and
by other private and public companies with which we believe we
generally compete for executives. To this end, with the help of
a consultant, we access a number of executive compensation
surveys and other databases and review them when making crucial
executive officer hiring decisions and annually when we review
executive compensation. We designed our executive bonus plan to
focus our management on achieving key corporate financial
objectives, to motivate certain desired individual behaviors and
to reward substantial achievement of these company financial
objectives and individual goals. We utilize cash bonuses to
reward performance achievements with a time horizon of one year
or less and we utilize salary as the base amount necessary to
match our competitors for executive talent. We utilize stock
options to reward long-term performance, with excellent
corporate performance and extended officer tenure producing
potentially significant value for the officer.
We view these components of compensation as related but
distinct. Although our compensation committee does review total
compensation, we do not believe that significant compensation
derived from one component of compensation should negate or
reduce compensation from other components. We determine the
appropriate level for each compensation component based in part,
but not exclusively, on competitive benchmarking consistent with
our recruiting and retention goals, our view of internal equity
and consistency, and other considerations we deem relevant, such
as rewarding extraordinary performance. We believe that, as is
common in the technology sector, stock option awards are the
primary compensation-related motivator in attracting and
retaining employees and that salary and bonus levels are
secondary considerations to most employees. Except as described
below, our compensation committee has not adopted any formal or
informal policies or guidelines for allocating compensation
between long-term and currently paid out compensation, between
cash and non-cash compensation, or among different forms of
non-cash compensation. However, our compensation
committee’s philosophy is to make a greater percentage of
an employee’s compensation performance-based as he or she
becomes more senior and to keep cash compensation to the minimum
competitive level while providing the opportunity to be well
rewarded through equity if the company performs well over time.
Our compensation committee’s current intent is to perform
at least annually a strategic review of our executive
officers’ compensation to determine whether they provide
adequate incentives and motivation to our executive officers and
whether they adequately compensate our executive officers
relative to comparable officers in other companies with which we
compete for executives. These companies may or may not be public
companies or even in all cases technology companies. Our
compensation committee’s most recent review occurred in
September 2006. Compensation committee meetings typically have
included, for all or a portion of each meeting, not only the
committee members but also our lead independent director, our
chief executive officer, our chief financial officer and our
general counsel. For compensation decisions, including decisions
regarding the grant of equity compensation, relating to
executive officers other than our chief executive officer, our
compensation committee typically considers recommendations from
the chief executive officer.
We account for equity compensation paid to our employees under
the rules of SFAS No. 123R, which requires us to estimate
and record an expense over the service period of the award.
Accounting rules also require us to record cash compensation as
an expense at the time the obligation is accrued. Unless and
until we achieve sustained profitability, the availability to us
of a tax deduction for compensation expense will not be material
to our financial position. We structure cash bonus compensation
so that it is taxable to our executives at the time it becomes
available to them. We currently intend that all cash
compensation paid will be tax deductible for us. However, with
respect to equity compensation awards, while any gain recognized
by employees from nonqualified options should be deductible, to
the extent that an option constitutes an incentive stock option
gain recognized by the optionee will not be deductible if there
is no disqualifying disposition by the optionee. In addition, if
we grant restricted stock or restricted stock unit awards that
are not subject to performance vesting, they may not be fully
deductible by us at the time the award is otherwise taxable to
the employee.
Benchmarking of
Base Compensation and Equity Holdings
At its September 2006 meeting, our compensation committee
decided to set executive officers’ salaries at a level that
was at or near the 60th percentile of salaries of
executives with similar roles at comparable pre-public and small
public companies and to set their aggregate share and option
holdings at a level that was at or near the 75th percentile
of executives in similar positions. Our compensation committee
believes that the 60th percentile for base salaries is the
minimum cash compensation level that would allow us to attract
and retain talented officers. However, because our compensation
committee fixed salaries near the median of comparable
officers’ salaries, it chose to make equity grants at or
near the level of the 75th percentile. Our compensation
committee realizes that using a benchmark may not always be
appropriate but believes that it is the best alternative at this
point in the life cycle of our company. In instances where an
executive officer is uniquely key to our success, our
compensation committee may provide compensation in excess of
these percentiles. Our compensation committee’s judgments
with regard to market levels of base compensation and aggregate
equity holdings were based on a report obtained from an
independent outside consulting firm specializing in executive
compensation, which was engaged by our compensation committee to
assist in the adjustment of the compensation to our executives;
the report compared our executive compensation with the
executive compensation at a number of recently public companies
and a number of similarly situated private companies, analyzing
various factors including employee headcount and revenues. The
compensation committee’s choice of the foregoing
percentiles to apply to the data in the report reflected
consideration of our stockholders’ interests in paying what
was necessary, but not significantly more than necessary, to
achieve our corporate goals, while conserving cash and equity as
much as practicable. We believe that, given the industry in
which we operate and the corporate culture that we have created,
base compensation and options at these percentage levels are
generally sufficient to retain our existing executive officers
and to hire new executive officers when and as required. At the
September and October 2006 meetings, based on these benchmarks,
our compensation committee recommended and our board of
directors subsequently approved salary increases and additional
option grants to our executive officers. The new annual salary
levels fixed in September 2006 for our executive officers are
reflected in the footnotes to the “Summary Compensation
Table — 2006” below and the numbers of shares
subject to the September and October 2006 option grants to these
officers are reflected in the “Grants of Plan-Based
Awards” table below.
Equity
Compensation
In February 2005, our compensation committee hired an
independent valuation firm to determine the fair market value of
our common stock as of December 15, 2004, and it has sought
periodic
valuation updates as of March 31, 2005, April 30,2005, June 30, 2005, September 30, 2005,
December 31, 2005, March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006,
and September 7, 2006. All equity awards to our employees,
including executive officers, and to our directors have been
granted and reflected in our consolidated financial statements,
based upon the applicable accounting guidance, at fair market
value on the grant date in accordance with the valuation
determined by our independent, outside valuation firm. We do not
have any program, plan or obligation that requires us to grant
equity compensation on specified dates and, because we have not
been a public company, we have not made equity grants in
connection with the release or withholding of material
non-public information. It is possible that we will establish
programs or policies of this sort in the future, but we do not
expect to do so prior to this offering. Authority to make equity
grants to executive officers rests with our compensation
committee, although, as noted above, our compensation committee
does consider the recommendations of our chief executive
officer. Prior to the original February 2005 engagement of an
independent valuation firm, our board of directors determined
the value of our common stock based on internal reports and
other relevant factors.
The value of the shares subject to the September 2006 option
grants to executive officers are reflected in the “Summary
Compensation Table — 2006” table below and
further information about these grants is reflected in the
“2006 Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table below.
Prior to this offering, our board of directors intends to adopt
a new equity plan described under “— Employee
Benefit Plans” below. The 2006 Equity Incentive Plan will
replace our existing 2001 Stock Option Plan immediately
following this offering and, as described below, will afford our
compensation committee much greater flexibility in making a wide
variety of equity awards. Participation in the 2006 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan that we intend to adopt prior to this
offering will also be available to all executive officers
following this offering on the same basis as our other employees.
Cash Bonuses
Under Our Non-Equity Incentive Plan
Our current executive bonus plan was adopted by our compensation
committee in February 2004 to reward all vice presidents and
more senior executive officers. It contemplates the payment of a
maximum annual bonus equal to an officer’s current annual
salary times a percentage fixed in the officer’s employment
offer letter or subsequently by our chief executive officer or,
in the case of our chief executive officer’s percentage,
our compensation committee. The percentages are currently 50%
for Mr. Ballard, 30% for Mr. Pimentel, 25% for
Ms. Braff and Mr. Galvagni and 10% to 25% for our
other officers. We pay bonuses quarterly with the maximum
potential bonus in a given quarter, except for
Mr. Ballard’s, equal to one-quarter of the maximum
annual bonus. We determined to pay bonuses quarterly because our
compensation committee believed a short-term orientation was
appropriate given the uncertainty and unpredictability of
operations in a small company. Mr. Ballard’s maximum
potential bonus in a given quarter is equal to 20% of his
maximum annual bonus, with the final 20% being paid after our
year-end based on his annual performance. The compensation
committee wanted Mr. Ballard’s bonus to be largely
aligned with those of the other executive officers but to
include a strategic component that went beyond the short-term
quarterly financial metrics. We define operational EBITDA, for
bonus purposes, to mean the estimated revenues that we will
ultimately recognize from end-user game downloads during the
quarter less the royalties associated with those revenues and
less our normal recurring cash operating expenses. Thus, we do
not subtract amortization or impairment of intangible assets,
impairment of prepaid royalties or guarantees, stock-based
compensation, depreciation, restructuring charges or any other
expenses that we consider nonrecurring. The compensation
committee felt that the largest portion of each bonus should be
based on our executive officers’ success as a team and thus
based on corporate financial goals, but that there should be
some ability to reward individual contributions. Each of the
three components of the bonus is independent of the other two
components, and we will pay the applicable percentage of the
bonus if an objective is attained, regardless of whether any or
all of the other objectives are attained. The compensation
committee chose revenues and operational EBITDA because it
believed that, as a “growth company,” we should reward
revenue growth, but only if that revenue growth is achieved cost
effectively. Likewise, it believed a “profitable
company” with little or no growth was not acceptable. Thus,
the compensation committee considered the chosen metrics to be
the best indicators of financial success and stockholder value
creation. The individual performance objectives are determined
by the executive officer to whom the potential bonus recipient
reports or, in the case of our chief executive officer, by our
lead independent director and one or more members of our
compensation committee, after taking input from the other
members of our board of directors. The basis for
Mr. Ballard’s bonus might include such objectives as
developing our executive team, successfully integrating
acquisitions, ensuring the creation of a sufficient number of
games, developing improved content strategy or developing
strategic opportunities.
Third quarter 2006 bonuses were below the maximum levels because
we did not achieve our operational EBITDA targets. We believe
that there is a reasonable likelihood that we will achieve our
targets in the fourth quarter of 2006 and pay the maximum
bonuses possible based on revenues and operational EBITDA. Our
bonus plan does not formally provide for the exercise of
discretion, but our compensation committee did exercise
discretion in the third quarter of 2006 in the following ways:
(1) to reduce to zero a bonus for a departed executive
officer; (2) to prorate the bonus of a former executive
officer who is no longer devoting full-time efforts to the
company; and (3) to provide small bonuses to two executive
officers whose region of geographical responsibility achieved
110% of its target but who suffered because company-wide goals
were not met due to other regions’ less robust performance.
In addition, our executive team determined not to accept bonuses
in the first quarter of 2006 in order to improve our
consolidated financial statements and achieve profitability more
rapidly. Further details about our executive bonus plan are
provided below in the footnotes to the “2006 Grants of
Plan-Based Awards” table, which shows the
“threshold” and “maximum” bonus amounts that
could have been earned by each named executive officer in 2006.
Since we have only recently started to pay bonuses, our
compensation committee has not considered whether it would
attempt to recover bonuses paid based on our financial
performance where our quarterly revenues or operational EBITDA
is restated in a downward direction sufficient to reduce the
amount of bonus that should have been paid under our plan
formulas.
Severance and
Change of Control Payments
From February 2002 to March 2006, our board of directors
included, as a default provision, an acceleration to the option
vesting schedule in options for director-level employees, vice
presidents and more senior executive officers if the optionee
was terminated for any reason other than for cause, disability
or death within six months following a change in our control.
For director-level employees, this acceleration related to up to
25% of the shares subject to non-vested options on the date of
termination, and, for vice presidents and more senior executive
officers, this acceleration related to up to 50% of the shares
subject to non-vested options on the date of termination. Our
board of directors was authorized to deviate from this
percentage in individual cases. The default acceleration
provision was used for executive officers in three instances:
(a) an option grant to Ms. Braff in April 2005 for
75,000 shares, (b) an option grant to Ms. Braff
in December 2005 for 30,000 shares, and (c) an option
grant to Mr. Galvagni in April 2005 for
130,000 shares. The majority of the options granted to our
executives during this period call for an acceleration of 50% of
their non-vested options upon involuntary termination of their
employment within 90 days of a change of control event.
In March 2006, our board of directors eliminated this default
provision. After that date, option grants may only contain a
change of control acceleration provision if specifically
authorized by our board of directors or our compensation
committee. Those individuals who were executive officers in
March 2006 retained the acceleration of vesting provisions that
were included in their options granted prior to March 2006.
As noted above, in September 2006 and October 2006,
Messrs. Ballard, Galvagni, Segerstråle and Pimentel
and Ms. Braff were granted options. With the exceptions of
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel, the grants included
provisions such that 50% of the non-vested shares will vest in
the event
the optionee is terminated for any reason other than cause,
disability or death within 90 days of a change of control
event.
In May 2006, following recommendation and approval from our
compensation committee, our board of directors determined to
enter into severance agreements with Messrs. Ballard and
Pimentel that contain change of control provisions. These
agreements are identical and described below under
“— Severance and Change of Control
Agreements.” These agreements, by their terms, pertained to
all options granted to Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel prior
to March 2006. Options subsequently granted to
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel have incorporated the terms of
these severance agreements.
In December 2006, following recommendation and approval
from our compensation committee, our board of directors
determined to amend the change of control acceleration
provisions for Messrs. Ballard, Pimentel and Galvagni and
Ms. Braff. With respect to Mr. Galvagni and
Ms. Braff, following this amendment, should the executive
terminate his or her employment for good reason, as defined
below, or be terminated, other than for cause or disability,
within 12 months after a change in control transaction,
that executive would continue for six months to receive his or
her then-current base salary and benefits (other than any
prospective bonus) he or she might have been eligible to
receive, would receive a bonus prorated for the portion of the
relevant period actually served and would become vested as to an
additional 50% of his or her options or shares of common stock
subject to our right of repurchase outstanding as of December
2006. With respect to Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel, we replaced
the definition of “good reason” in each
executive’s severance agreement described below with the
definition of “good reason” provided in
“— Executive Compensation — Severance
and Change of Control Agreements” below. In addition, for
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel the severance payment of
salary and benefits other than bonus would continue for
12 months, rather than six months as previously provided,
in the event that the executive terminates his employment for
good reason or is terminated for other than cause or disability.
Our board of directors determined to provide these change of
control arrangements in order to mitigate some of the risk that
exists for executives working in a small, dynamic startup
company, an environment where there is a meaningful likelihood
that we may be acquired. These arrangements are intended to
attract and retain qualified executives that have alternatives
that may appear to them to be less risky absent these
arrangements, and mitigate a potential disincentive to
consideration and execution of such an acquisition, particularly
where the services of these executive officers may not be
required by the acquirer. For quantification of these severance
and change of control benefits, please see the discussion under
“— Executive Compensation — Severance
and Change of Control Agreements” below.
Absent a change of control event, upon termination, no executive
officer is entitled to either equity vesting acceleration or
cash severance payments.
Other
Benefits
Executive officers are eligible to participate in all of our
employee benefit plans, such as medical, dental, vision, group
life, disability, and accidental death and dismemberment
insurance and our 401(k) plan, in each case on the same basis as
other employees. There were no special benefits or perquisites
provided to any executive officer in 2006.
Our officers and employees in Europe and Hong Kong generally
have somewhat different employee benefit plans than those we
offer domestically, typically based on the requirements of their
respective countries of domicile.
The following table provides information regarding all plan and
non-plan compensation awarded to, earned by or paid to each of
our executive officers serving as such at the end of 2006 for
all services rendered in all capacities to us during 2006, based
on the information available to us as of December 19, 2006.
We refer to these five executive officers as our named executive
officers.
Summary
Compensation Table — 2006
Non-Equity
Name
and
Option
Incentive
Plan
Principal
Position
Salary(1)
Bonus(2)
Awards(3)
Compensation(4)
Total(5)
L. Gregory Ballard
$
281,250
—
$997,601
$
37,125
$
1,315,976
Chief Executive Officer
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel
223,750
—
619,108
23,865
866,723
Chief Financial Officer
Jill S. Braff
217,500
—
506,543
36,925
760,968
Senior Vice President of Worldwide
Marketing
Alessandro Galvagni
198,750
—
506,543
33,613
738,906
Senior Vice President of Product
Development
Kristian Segerstråle
220,019
—
450,200
14,466
684,685
Managing Director, EMEA
(1)
The amounts in this column include any salary contributed by the
named executive officer to our 401(k) plan.
Mr. Segerstråle’s annual salary is £120,000;
the figure of $220,019 is obtained using an exchange ratio of
£1 to $1.83349, the average exchange rate in 2006 through
December 4, 2006. In September 2006, our compensation
committee set annual base compensation for these executive
officers, effective October 1, 2006, as follows:
Mr. Ballard — $300,000;
Mr. Pimentel — $250,000;
Ms. Braff — $240,000; and
Mr. Galvagni — $240,000.
Mr. Segerstråle’s salary was not increased.
(2)
Bonus amounts paid in 2006 were made under our executive bonus
plan and are included in the “Non-Equity Incentive Plan
Compensation” column.
(3)
The amounts in this column represent the aggregate grant date
fair value, computed in accordance with SFAS No. 123R,
of all options granted to the named executive officer in 2006,
less in the case of modified or replacement options the fair
value of the option modified or replaced. Our compensation cost
for these option grants is similarly based on the grant date
fair market value but is recognized over the period, typically
four years, in which the executive officer must provide services
in order to earn the award. The July 20, 2006 option grant
to Mr. Ballard shown in the “2006 Grants of Plan-Based
Awards” table is valued above at zero; it did not create
any incremental fair value on the replacement date since it had
a higher exercise price than the option that it replaced. Please
see footnote (4) to the “2006 Grant of Plan-Based
Awards” table for a discussion of this grant to
Mr. Ballard. Please see note 12 of the notes to our
consolidated financial statements for a discussion of all
assumptions made in determining the grant date fair values of
the options we granted in 2006.
(4)
The amounts in this column represent total performance-based
bonuses earned for services rendered during 2006. These bonuses
were earned in the first three quarters of 2006 and were based
entirely on our financial performance and the executive
officer’s performance against his or her specified
individual objectives. The bonus earned for the last quarter of
2006 will be paid in 2007.
The figure for Mr. Segerstråle’s bonus was
obtained using an exchange ratio of £1 to $1.83349, the
average exchange rate in 2006 through December 4, 2006.
(5)
The dollar value in this column for each named executive officer
represents the sum of all compensation reflected in the
preceding columns.
The following table provides information with regard to
potential cash bonuses paid or payable in 2006 under our
performance-based, non-equity incentive plan, and with regard to
each stock option granted to each named executive officer during
2006, based on the information available to us as of
December 19, 2006. There were no equity incentive plan
awards in 2006.
2006 Grants of
Plan-Based Awards
Number of
Shares
Exercise
Estimated Future
Payouts Under Non-Equity
Underlying
Price of
Grant
Incentive Plan
Awards(1)
Option
Option
Name
Date
Threshold
Maximum
Awards(2)
Awards(3)
L. Gregory Ballard
7/20/06
$
45,000
$
140,625
550,000
(4)
$
1.30
9/7/06
400,000
3.51
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel
9/7/06
21,480
67,125
275,000
3.51
Jill S. Braff
9/7/06
17,400
54,375
225,000
3.51
Alessandro Galvagni
9/7/06
15,900
49,688
225,000
3.51
Kristian Segerstråle
10/31/06
14,092
44,038
200,000
3.51
(1)
Under our current executive bonus plan, 40% of each quarterly
bonus is based on our performance relative to our revenue plan
and 40% is based on our performance relative to our operational
EBITDA plan, in each case with 40% of the maximum amount for
that portion of the bonus being paid if we achieve at least 90%
of our plan, 70% if we achieve at least 95% of our plan and 100%
if we meet or exceed our plan. The final 20% of each quarterly
bonus is based on the percentage of individual objectives that
the chief executive officer determines the executive officer
met. These objectives typically include qualitative and
quantitative elements such as demonstrated leadership and
achieving spending within plan for the officer’s area of
functional responsibility, as well as tactical and strategic
objectives to be achieved within the officer’s functional
area. Beginning with the first quarter of 2007, the percentages
for revenue plan performance, operational EBITDA performance and
individual objectives will be 37.5%, 37.5% and 25%,
respectively. In the table above, the “Threshold”
column represents the smallest total bonus that would have been
paid in 2006 to each named executive officer if, in each quarter
of 2006, we had achieved the minimum revenues and operational
EBITDA amounts required for the payment of any bonus but the
executive officer did not meet any of his or her individual
objectives. Payment of the applicable portion of each bonus is
contingent on (a) our having achieved either (i) at
least 90% of our revenue plan or (ii) at least 90% of our
operational EBITDA plan or (b) the executive officer’s
achieving one or more of his individual performance goals.
Failure to meet any of these conditions in any quarter would
result in an executive officer’s receiving no bonus. The
“Maximum” column represents the largest total bonus
that could be paid to each named executive officer if all
corporate financial and individual objectives are met in each
quarter of 2006. The actual bonus amount earned by each named
executive officer in 2006 is shown in the “Summary
Compensation Table — 2006” above.
(2)
All option awards were made under our 2001 Stock Option Plan,
which is described below under “— Employee
Benefit Plans” below. Each award is divided into two
options, with one option covering shares designated as an
incentive stock option and the other option covering the
remaining shares designated as a nonqualified stock option.
Other than the grant to Mr. Ballard in July 2006,
which is described in footnote (4) below, the options vest
as to 1/4 of the shares of common stock underlying the options
on the first anniversary of the grant date and as to 1/48 of the
underlying shares monthly thereafter. These options contain
provisions that call for accelerated vesting upon certain events
following a change of control event, as discussed above in
“— Executive Compensation —
Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Severance and
Change of Control Payments” and below in
“— Executive
Compensation — Severance and Change of Control
Agreements.”
(3)
Represents the fair market value of a share of our common stock,
as determined by our board of directors, on the option’s
grant date. Please see “— Executive
Compensation — Compensation Discussion and
Analysis — Equity Compensation” above for a
discussion of how we have valued our common stock.
(4)
This option was granted to replace an option of like size and
similar terms, but with an exercise price of $0.75, which was
granted in February 2005. In April 2006, we learned that the
March 2005 option was granted with an exercise price of less
than fair market value at the grant date; our board of directors
and Mr. Ballard agreed to cancel the March 2005 option and
replace it with a grant of like size and terms, but with an
exercise price $1.30, which a valuation report from our
independent valuation firm determined was not less than the then
fair market value of a share of our common stock. The
replacement grant retained all of the terms of the original
grant other than the exercise price and a new expiration date of
July 20, 2016.
The following table provides information regarding each
unexercised stock option held by each of our named executive
officers as of December 31, 2006, based on the information
available to us as of December 19, 2006.
Except as otherwise described in these footnotes, each option
vests as to 1/4 of the shares of common stock underlying it on
the first anniversary of the grant date and as to 1/48 of the
shares
of common stock underlying it each month thereafter. In December
2004, our board of directors amended the stock options granted
to employees at the level of vice president and above such that
their previously granted stock options would be immediately
exercisable, and determined that, unless otherwise approved by
our board of directors or our compensation committee, future
option grants to these employees would also be immediately
exercisable. Any options exercised prior to their vesting date
would be subject to our right of repurchase as specified in the
2001 Stock Option Plan.
(2)
Represents the fair market value of a share of our common stock,
as determined by our board of directors, on the option’s
grant date. Please see “— Executive
Compensation — Compensation Discussion and
Analysis — Equity Compensation” above for a
discussion of how we have valued our common stock.
(3)
In May 2006, upon recommendation and approval from our
compensation committee, we entered into the severance agreement
described below under “— Executive Compensation
— Severance and Change of Control Agreements,”
including a change of control provision, with Mr. Ballard.
This agreement covered all stock option grants made to
Mr. Ballard prior to March 2006, but the terms of this
agreement were incorporated into a replacement grant to
Mr. Ballard in July 2006 and into the grant to
Mr. Ballard in September 2006.
(4)
Vests monthly as to 1/48 of the shares of common stock
underlying the option.
(5)
This stock option grant was immediately exercisable. Vests as to
1/2 of the shares of common stock underlying the option on the
second anniversary of the grant date and as to 1/48 of the
shares of common stock underlying the option monthly thereafter.
Any unvested shares vest upon the completion of this offering.
(6)
In May 2006, upon recommendation and approval from our
compensation committee, we entered into the severance agreement
described below under “— Executive Compensation
— Severance and Change of Control Agreements,”
including a change of control provision, with Mr. Pimentel.
This agreement covered all stock option grants made to
Mr. Pimentel prior to March 2006, but the terms of this
agreement were incorporated into the grant to Mr. Pimentel
in September 2006.
(7)
Option was fully vested on grant date.
The following table shows the number of shares acquired pursuant
to the exercise of options by each named executive officer
during 2006 and the aggregate dollar amount realized by the
named executive officer upon exercise of the option, based on
the information available to us as of December 19, 2006.
2006 Option
Exercises
Number of
Shares
Acquired
Value Realized
Name
on
Exercise
on
Exercise(1)
L. Gregory Ballard
533,333
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel
—
—
Jill S. Braff
—
—
Alessandro Galvagni
—
—
Kristian Segerstråle
—
—
(1)
The aggregate dollar amount realized upon the exercise of an
option represents the difference between the aggregate market
price of the shares of our common stock underlying that option
on the date of exercise, which we have assumed to be the
midpoint of the price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, and the aggregate exercise price of the option.
In May 2006, we entered into severance agreements with
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel, which were amended in
December 2006 as described above under
“— Executive Compensation —
Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Severance and
Change of Control Payments.” Each agreement provides that,
should the executive terminate his employment for “good
reason” or be terminated, other than for “cause”
or disability, within 12 months after a “change in
control transaction,” he would continue for 12 months
to receive his then-current base salary and benefits (other than
any prospective bonus) he might have been eligible to receive.
Each such executive will also be eligible to receive a partial
bonus prorated for the portion of the relevant period served by
the executive prior to the termination. Additionally, all of his
unvested options or shares of common stock subject to our
lapsing right of repurchase outstanding would become fully
vested.
Ms. Braff and Mr. Galvagni
In December 2006, our board of directors approved revised
severance arrangements with Ms. Braff and
Mr. Galvagni, under which, should the executive terminate
his or her employment for “good reason” or be
terminated, other than for “cause” or disability,
within 12 months after a “change in control
transaction,” the executive would continue for six months
to receive his or her then-current base salary and benefits
(other than any bonus) the executive might have been eligible to
receive. Each such executive will also be eligible to receive a
partial bonus prorated for the portion of the relevant period
served by the executive prior to the termination. Additionally,
each of these executives outstanding unvested options or
outstanding shares of common stock subject to our lapsing right
of repurchase outstanding would become vested as to an
additional 50% of the shares originally subject to that option
or lapsing repurchase right.
The following definitions are utilized in the severance
arrangements with each of Messrs. Ballard, Galvagni and
Pimentel and Ms. Braff:
A “change in control transaction” is defined to mean
the closing of (i) a merger or consolidation in one
transaction or a series of related transactions, in which our
stockholders before the merger or consolidation own less than
50% of the outstanding voting equity securities of the surviving
corporation after the transaction or series of related
transactions, (ii) a sale or other transfer of all or
substantially all of our assets as a going concern, in one
transaction or a series of related transactions, followed by the
distribution to our stockholders of any proceeds remaining after
payment of creditors or (iii) a transfer of more than 50%
of our outstanding voting equity securities by our stockholders
to one or more related persons or entities other than our
company in one transaction or a series of related transactions.
“Good reason” is defined to mean (i) without his
or her express written consent, a significant reduction in his
or her duties, position or responsibilities, or his or her
removal from these duties, position and responsibilities, unless
he or she is provided with a position of substantially equal or
greater organizational level, duties, authority and
compensation; provided, however, that a change of title, in and
of itself, or a reduction of duties, position or
responsibilities solely by virtue of our being acquired and made
part of a larger entity will not constitute “good
reason,” (ii) a greater than 15% reduction in his or
her then-current annual base compensation that is not applicable
to our other executive officers, or (iii) without his or
her express written consent, a relocation to a facility or a
location more than 30 miles from his or her then-current
location of employment.
“Cause” is defined to mean (i) the
executive’s committing an act of gross negligence, gross
misconduct or dishonesty, or other willful act, including
misappropriation, embezzlement or fraud, that materially
adversely affects us or any of our customers, suppliers or
partners, (ii) his personal dishonesty, willful misconduct
in the performance of services for us, or breach of fiduciary
duty involving personal profit, (iii) his being convicted
of, or pleading no contest to, any felony or misdemeanor
involving fraud, breach of trust or misappropriation or any
other act that our board of
directors reasonably believes in good faith has materially
adversely affected, or upon disclosure will materially adversely
affect, us, including our public reputation, (iv) any
material breach of any agreement with us by him that remains
uncured for 30 days after written notice by us to him,
unless that breach is incapable of cure, or any other material
unauthorized use or disclosure of our confidential information
or trade secrets involving personal benefit or (v) his
failure to follow the lawful directions of our board of
directors or, if he is not the chief executive officer, the
lawful directions of the chief executive officer, in the scope
of his employment unless he reasonably believes in good faith
that these directions are not lawful and notifies our board of
directors or chief executive officer, as the case may be, of the
reasons for his belief.
The following table describes the potential payments for each
named executive officer upon involuntary termination or
termination for good reason within 12 months following a
change in our control:
Equity
Benefits and
Name
Salary
Acceleration(2)
Perquisites(3)
L. Gregory Ballard
$
300,000
$
5,345,442
$
8,622
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel
250,000
2,712,156
8,622
Jill S. Braff
120,000
900,901
4,311
Alessandro Galvagni
120,000
663,246
1,705
Kristian Segerstråle
—
—
—
(1)
Reflects 12 months of continued salary in the cases of
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel and six months of
continued salary in the cases of the other named executive
officers.
(2)
Calculated based on the change in control taking place as of
December 31, 2006 and based on the fair market value of
shares as of that date. Reflects 100% acceleration of vesting of
equity awards in the cases of Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel,
and reflects 50% acceleration of vesting of equity awards in the
cases of the other named executive officers, in each case as of
that date.
(3)
Reflects 12 months of continued health (medical, dental and
vision) and life insurance benefits in the cases of
Messrs. Ballard and Pimentel and six months of
continued health (medical, dental and vision) and life insurance
benefits in the cases of the other named executive officers.
Employment
Agreements and Offer Letters
We are party to the following agreements contained in employment
offer letters with our named executive officers.
L. Gregory
Ballard
On September 23, 2003, Mr. Ballard executed our
written offer of employment as our Chief Executive Officer and
President. The written offer of employment specifies that
Mr. Ballard’s employment with us is “at
will.” Mr. Ballard’s current base compensation is
$300,000. He is currently eligible to receive a bonus of up to
50% of his base compensation. The provision of
Mr. Ballard’s offer letter regarding termination upon
a “change in control” event has been superseded by the
Severance Agreement described above in
“— Severance and Change of Control
Agreements.”
Albert A.
“Rocky” Pimentel
On September 28, 2004, Mr. Pimentel executed our
written offer of employment as our Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer. The written offer of employment
specifies that Mr. Pimentel’s employment with us is
“at will.” Mr. Pimentel’s current base
compensation is $250,000. He is currently eligible to receive a
bonus of up to 30% of his base compensation. The provision of
Mr. Pimentel’s offer letter regarding termination upon
a “change of control” event has been superseded by the
Severance Agreement described above in
“— Severance and Change of Control
Agreements.”
On September 23, 2002, Mr. Galvagni executed our
written offer of employment as our Chief Technical Officer
commencing on September 30, 2002. He is currently Senior
Vice President of Product Development and Chief Technology
Officer. The written offer of employment does not specify a
specific term for Mr. Galvagni’s employment; rather,
Mr. Galvagni’s employment with us is “at
will.” Mr. Galvagni’s current base compensation
is $240,000. He is currently eligible to receive a bonus of up
to 25% of his base compensation.
Jill S.
Braff
On December 23, 2003, Ms. Braff executed our written
offer of employment as our Vice President, Marketing commencing
on December 29, 2003. She is currently Senior Vice
President of Worldwide Marketing and General Manager of the
Americas. This offer letter was subsequently amended on
July 23, 2004. The written offer of employment does not
specify a specific term for Ms. Braff’s employment;
rather, Ms. Braff’s employment with us is “at
will.” Ms. Braff’s current base compensation is
$240,000. She is currently eligible to receive a bonus of up to
25% of her base compensation.
Kristian
Segerstråle
In December 2004, Mr. Segerstråle executed our
written offer of employment as our Vice President of Production
for our United Kingdom subsidiary. He is currently the Managing
Director of our United Kingdom subsidiary. The written offer of
employment does not specify a specific term for
Mr. Segerstråle’s employment. Rather,
Mr. Segerstråle’s employment with us is “at
will” and thus may be terminated any time for any or no
reason, provided that either party terminating the agreement
must give at least the greater of four weeks’ notice or the
statutory minimum under United Kingdom regulations. The
agreement can be terminated immediately upon the occurrence of
certain situations, including, but not limited to,
Mr. Segerstråle’s committing an act of gross
misconduct or the material breach this agreement.
Mr. Segerstråle’s current base compensation is
£120,000, approximately $220,019 using an exchange ratio of
£1 to $1.83349, the average exchange rate in 2006 through
December 4, 2006. He is currently eligible to receive a
bonus of up to 20% of his base compensation.
Employee Benefit
Plans
2001 Second
Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan
Our board of directors adopted, and our stockholders approved,
our 2001 Stock Option Plan in December 2001. The 2001 Stock
Option Plan has been amended from time to time, and we refer to
it in this prospectus as the 2001 Stock Option Plan. The 2001
Stock Option Plan provides for the grant of both incentive stock
options, which qualify for favorable tax treatment to their
recipients under Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and nonqualified stock
options. Incentive stock options may be granted only to our
employees and those of our subsidiaries. Nonqualified stock
options may be granted to our employees, directors, consultants,
independent contractors and advisors and those of our
subsidiaries. The exercise price of incentive stock options must
be at least equal to the fair market value of our common stock
on the date of grant. The exercise price of incentive stock
options granted to 10% stockholders must be at least equal to
110% of the fair market value of our common stock on the grant
date. The maximum permitted term of options granted under our
2001 Stock Option Plan is ten years. In the event of a change in
control, the 2001 Stock Plan provides that options held by
current employees, directors and consultants that are not
assumed may, at the discretion of our board of directors, vest
in full prior to that change in control and that all unexercised
options expire on the consummation of the change in control.
As of September 30, 2006, we had reserved
13,494,922 shares of our common stock for issuance under
our 2001 Stock Option Plan. As of September 30, 2006,
options to purchase 3,223,267 of these shares had been
exercised, options to purchase 8,158,311 of these shares
remained outstanding and 2,113,344 of these shares remained
available for future grant. The options outstanding as of
September 30, 2006 had a weighted average exercise price of
$1.45. Our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan will be effective upon the
date of this prospectus. The 2001 Stock Option Plan will
terminate on that date, and thereafter we will not grant any
additional options under the 2001 Stock Option Plan. However,
any outstanding options granted under the 2001 Stock Option Plan
will remain outstanding, subject to the terms of our 2001 Stock
Option Plan and stock option agreements, until the options are
exercised or until they terminate or expire by their terms.
Options granted under the 2001 Stock Option Plan have terms
similar to those described below with respect to options granted
under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, except
that .
2006 Equity
Incentive Plan
We anticipate that we will adopt a 2006 Equity Incentive Plan
that will become effective on the date of this prospectus and
will serve as the successor to our 2001 Stock Option Plan. We
anticipate that we will
reserve shares
of our common stock to be issued under our 2006 Equity Incentive
Plan. In addition, we anticipate that shares not issued or
subject to outstanding grants under our 2001 Stock Option Plan
on the date of this prospectus, and any shares issued under the
2001 Stock Option Plan that are forfeited or repurchased by us
or that are issuable upon exercise of options that expire or
become unexercisable for any reason without having been
exercised in full, will be available for grant and issuance
under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan. We anticipate that the
number of shares available for grant and issuance under the 2006
Equity Incentive Plan will be increased on January 1 of
each of 2008 through 2010 by an amount equal
to % of our shares outstanding on
the immediately preceding December 31, up to an aggregate
maximum
of ,
unless our board of directors, in its discretion, determines to
make a smaller increase. In addition, the following shares will
again be available for grant and issuance under our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan:
•
shares subject to an option granted under our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan that cease to be subject to the option for any
reason other than exercise of the option;
•
shares subject to an award granted under our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan that are subsequently forfeited or repurchased by
us at the original issue price; or
•
shares subject to an award granted under our 2006 Equity
Incentive Plan that otherwise terminates without shares being
issued.
We anticipate that our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan will terminate
ten years from the date our board of directors approves the
plan, unless it is terminated earlier by our board of directors.
Our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan authorizes the award of stock
options, restricted stock awards, stock appreciation rights,
restricted stock units and stock bonuses. No person will be
eligible to receive more than 1,000,000 shares in any
calendar year under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan other than a
new employee of ours or a new employee of any parent or
subsidiary of ours, who will be eligible to receive no more than
2,000,000 shares under the plan in the calendar year in
which the employee commences employment.
Our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan will be administered by our
compensation committee, all of the members of which are
non-employee directors under applicable federal securities laws
and outside directors as defined under applicable federal tax
laws. Our compensation committee will have the authority to
construe and interpret our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, grant
awards and make all other determinations necessary or advisable
for the administration of the plan.
We anticipate that our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan will provide
for the grant of incentive stock options that qualify under
Section 422 of the Code only to our employees and those of
any parent or subsidiary of ours. All awards other than
incentive stock options may be granted to our employees,
directors, consultants, independent contractors and advisors or
those of any parent or subsidiary of ours, provided the
consultants, independent contractors and advisors render
services not in connection with the offer and sale of securities
in a capital-raising transaction. The exercise price of stock
options must be at least equal to the fair market value of our
common stock on the grant date. The exercise price of incentive
stock options granted to 10% stockholders must be at least equal
to 110% of that value.
Our compensation committee may provide for options to be
exercised only as they vest or to be immediately exercisable
with any shares issued on exercise being subject to our right of
repurchase that lapses as the shares vest. In general, options
will vest over a four-year period. The maximum term of options
granted under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan is ten years.
A restricted stock award is an offer by us to sell shares of our
common stock subject to restrictions. The price, if any, of a
restricted stock award will be determined by our compensation
committee. Unless otherwise determined by our compensation
committee at the time of award, vesting will cease on the date
the participant no longer provides services to us and unvested
shares will be forfeited to us.
Stock appreciation rights provide for a payment, or payments, in
cash or shares of our common stock, to the holder based upon the
difference between the fair market value of our common stock on
the date of exercise and the stated exercise price up to a
maximum amount of cash or number of shares. Stock appreciation
rights may vest based on time or achievement of performance
conditions.
Restricted stock units represent the right to receive shares of
our common stock at a specified date in the future, subject to
forfeiture of that right because of termination of employment or
failure to achieve certain performance conditions. If a
restricted stock unit has not been forfeited, then on the date
specified in the restricted stock unit agreement, we will
deliver to the holder of the restricted stock unit whole shares
of our common stock, which may be subject to additional
restrictions, cash or a combination of our common stock and cash.
Stock bonuses would be granted as additional compensation for
service and/or performance and therefore not be issued in
exchange for cash.
Awards granted under our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan may not be
transferred in any manner other than by will or by the laws of
descent and distribution or as determined by our compensation
committee. Unless otherwise restricted by our compensation
committee, awards that are nonqualified stock options may be
exercised during the lifetime of the optionee only by the
optionee, the optionee’s guardian or legal representative,
or a family member of the optionee who has acquired the option
by a permitted transfer. Awards that are incentive stock options
may be exercised during the lifetime of the optionee only by the
optionee or the optionee’s guardian or legal
representative. Options granted under our 2006 Equity Incentive
Plan generally may be exercised for a period of three months
after the termination of the optionee’s service to us or
any parent or subsidiary of ours. Options will generally
terminate immediately upon termination of employment for cause.
If we are dissolved or liquidated or have a change in control
transaction, outstanding awards, including any vesting
provisions, may be assumed or substituted by the successor
company. Outstanding awards that are not assumed or substituted
will expire upon the dissolution, liquidation or closing of a
change in control transaction. In the discretion of our
compensation committee, the vesting of these awards may be
accelerated upon the occurrence of these types of transactions.
2006 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
We anticipate that we will adopt a 2006 Employee Stock Purchase
Plan that is designed to enable eligible employees to purchase
shares of our common stock periodically at a discount. Purchases
are accomplished through participation in discrete offering
periods. Our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan will be intended
to qualify as an employee stock purchase plan under
Section 423 of the Code. We anticipate that we will seek
approval of our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan from our board
of directors and our stockholders to be effective upon
completion of this offering.
We anticipate that we will initially
reserve shares
of our common stock for issuance under our 2006 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan. We anticipate that the number of shares reserved
for issuance under our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan will
increase automatically on the first day of each January,
starting with January 1, 2008, by the number of shares
equal to % of our total outstanding shares as of the
immediately preceding December 31st (rounded to the nearest
whole share); provided, however, that, for the increase on
January 1, 2008, this addition will equal the product of 1%
of our total outstanding shares as of December 31, 2007,
multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number
of days between the effective date of this registration
statement and December 31, 2007 and the denominator of
which is 365 (rounded to the nearest whole share). Our board of
directors or compensation committee may reduce the amount of the
increase in any particular year. No more
than shares
of our common stock may be issued under our 2006 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, and no other shares may be added to this plan
without the approval of our stockholders.
Our compensation committee will administer our 2006 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan. Our employees generally are eligible to
participate in our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan if they are
employed by us, or a subsidiary of ours that we designate, for
more
than hours
per week and more than months in a
calendar year. Employees who are %
stockholders, or would become %
stockholders as a result of their participation in our 2006
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, are ineligible to participate in
our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. We may impose additional
restrictions on eligibility as well. Under our 2006 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, eligible employees may acquire shares of
our common stock by accumulating funds through payroll
deductions. Our eligible employees may select a rate of payroll
deduction between 1% and % of their
cash compensation. We also have the right to amend or terminate
our 2006 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, except that, subject to
certain exceptions, no such action may adversely affect any
outstanding rights to purchase stock under the plan. Our 2006
Employee Stock Purchase Plan will terminate on the tenth
anniversary of the first offering date, unless it is terminated
earlier by our board of directors.
When an offering period commences, our employees who meet the
eligibility requirements for participation in that offering
period are automatically granted a non-transferable option to
purchase shares in that offering period. Each offering period
may run for no more
than
months and consist of no more than three purchase periods. An
employee’s participation automatically ends upon
termination of employment for any reason.
Except for the first offering period, each offering period will
be
for months — commencing
each August 15th and February 15th on and after
August 15, 2007 — and will consist of two
six-month purchase periods — August 15th to
February 14th and February 15th to August 14th.
The first offering period will begin upon the effective date of
this offering and will end
on 2008.
The first purchase period in this first offering period will run
until August 14, 2007 and the second purchase period in
this first offering period will run from August 15, 2007 to
February 14, 2008.
No participant will have the right to purchase our shares at a
rate which, when aggregated with purchase rights under all our
employee stock purchase plans that are also outstanding in the
same calendar year(s), have a fair market value of more than
$ , determined as of the first day
of the applicable offering period, for each calendar year in
which that right is outstanding. The purchase price for shares
of our common stock purchased under our 2006 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan will be 85% of the lesser of the fair market value
of our common stock on (i) the first trading day of the
applicable offering period and (ii) the last trading day of
each purchase period in the applicable offering period.
In the event of a change in control transaction, our 2006
Employee Stock Purchase Plan and any offering periods that
commenced prior to the closing of the proposed transaction may
terminate on the closing of the proposed transaction and the
final purchase of shares will occur on that date, but our
compensation committee may instead terminate any such offering
period at a different date.
We sponsor a retirement plan intended to qualify for favorable
tax treatment under Section 401(k) of the Code. Employees
who have attained at least 21 years of age are generally
eligible to participate in the plan on their first pay period.
Participants may make pre-tax contributions to the plan from
their eligible earnings up to the statutorily prescribed annual
limit on pre-tax contributions under the Code. Participants who
are 50 years of age or older may contribute additional
amounts based on the statutory limits for
catch-up
contributions. Pre-tax contributions by participants to the plan
and the income earned on those contributions are generally not
taxable to participants until withdrawn. Participant
contributions are held in trust as required by law. No minimum
benefit is provided under the plan. For each employee that
completes 1,000 hours of service during the year, we may
elect to match a percentage of his or her contributions. The
plan has a profit-sharing element whereby we can make a
contribution in an amount to be determined annually by our board
of directors. An employee’s interest in his or her
deferrals is 100% vested when contributed, and any employer
matching or profit-sharing contributions will vest equally each
year over four years.
Limitation of
Liability and Indemnification of Directors and
Officers
Our restated certificate of incorporation contains provisions
that limit the liability of our directors for monetary damages
to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. Consequently,
our directors will not be personally liable to us or our
stockholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary
duties as directors, except liability for the following:
•
any breach of their duty of loyalty to our company or our
stockholders;
•
acts or omissions not in good faith or that involve intentional
misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
•
unlawful payments of dividends or unlawful stock repurchases or
redemptions as provided in Section 174 of the Delaware
General Corporation Law; or
•
any transaction from which they derived an improper personal
benefit.
Our restated bylaws provide that we shall indemnify, to the
fullest extent permitted by law, any person who is or was a
party or is threatened to be made a party to any action, suit or
proceeding, by reason of the fact that he or she is or was one
of our directors or officers or is or was serving at our request
as a director or officer of another corporation, partnership,
joint venture, trust or other enterprise. Our restated bylaws
provide that we may indemnify, to the fullest extent permitted
by law, any person who is or was a party or is threatened to be
made a party to any action, suit or proceeding, by reason of the
fact that he or she is or was one of our employees or agents or
is or was serving at our request as an employee or agent of
another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other
enterprise. Our restated bylaws also provide that we must
advance expenses incurred by or on behalf of a director or
officer in advance of the final disposition of any action or
proceeding, subject to very limited exceptions.
We have obtained insurance policies under which, subject to the
limitations of the policies, coverage is provided to our
directors and officers against loss arising from claims made by
reason of breach of fiduciary duty or other wrongful acts as a
director or officer, including claims relating to public
securities matters, and to us with respect to payments that may
be made by us to these officers and directors pursuant to our
indemnification obligations or otherwise as a matter of law.
Prior to completion of this offering, we intend to enter into
indemnity agreements with each of our directors and executive
officers that may be broader than the specific indemnification
provisions contained in the Delaware General Corporation Law.
These indemnity agreements may require us, among other things,
to indemnify our directors and executive officers against
liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service.
These indemnity agreements may also require us to advance all
expenses incurred by the directors and executive officers in
investigating or defending any such
action, suit or proceeding. We believe that these agreements are
necessary to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve
as directors and executive officers.
At present, we are not aware of any pending litigation or
proceeding involving any person who is or was one of our
directors, officers, employees or other agents or is or was
serving at our request as a director, officer, employee or agent
of another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or
other enterprise, for which indemnification is sought, and we
are not aware of any threatened litigation that may result in
claims for indemnification.
The underwriting agreement provides for indemnification by the
underwriters of us and our officers, directors and employees for
certain liabilities arising under the Securities Act or
otherwise.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or
persons controlling our company pursuant to the foregoing
provisions, we have been informed that, in the opinion of the
SEC, that indemnification is against public policy as expressed
in the Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.
In addition to the compensation arrangements, including
employment, termination of employment and
change-in-control
and indemnification arrangements, discussed, when required,
above under “Management,” and the registration rights
described below under “Description of Capital
Stock — Registration Rights,” the following is a
description of each transaction since January 1, 2003 and
each currently proposed transaction in which:
•
we have been or are to be a participant;
•
the amount involved exceeds $120,000; and
•
any of our directors, executive officers or holders of more than
5% of our capital stock, or any immediate family member of or
person sharing the household with any of these individuals, had
or will have a direct or indirect material interest.
Promissory Note
and Preferred Stock Financings
In March 2003, we issued convertible promissory notes in
the aggregate principal amount of $1.0 million and warrants
to purchase an aggregate of 212,036 shares of Series B
Preferred Stock with an exercise price of $0.64. The notes,
together with accrued interest, were converted into an aggregate
of 1,573,029 shares of our Series B Preferred Stock in
April 2003.
In April 2003 and June 2003, we sold an aggregate of
8,593,750 shares of our Series B Preferred Stock at a
purchase price of $0.64 per share for an aggregate purchase
price of approximately $5.5 million, which includes the
amount raised pursuant to the issuance of the convertible
promissory notes described above. In June 2004 and
August 2004, we sold an aggregate of 12,046,016 shares
of our Series C Preferred Stock at a purchase price of
$1.6603 per share for an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $20.0 million. In April 2005 and
July 2005, we sold an aggregate of 6,701,510 shares of
our Series D Preferred Stock at a purchase price of
$3.01 per share for an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $20.2 million. In July 2005, we sold an
aggregate of 2,491,694 shares of our
Series D-1
Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $3.01 per share for
an aggregate purchase price of approximately $7.5 million.
Each share of our preferred stock will automatically convert
into one share of our common stock upon the completion of this
offering. The purchasers of these shares of preferred stock are
entitled to specified registration rights. See “Description
of Capital Stock — Registration Rights.” The
following table summarizes our securities, reflected on an
as-converted to common stock basis, purchased by our executive
officers, directors and holders of more than 5% of our
outstanding common stock since January 1, 2003 in
connection with the transactions described above in this
section. The terms of these purchases were the same as those
made available to unaffiliated purchasers.
Warrants to
Shares of
Purchase
Shares of
Shares of
Shares of
Convertible
Series B
Series B
Series C
Series D
Series D-1
Promissory
Preferred
Preferred
Preferred
Preferred
Preferred
Name
Notes
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
Stock
BAVP, L.P.(1)
—
—
—
5,992,893
923,852
—
Amy N. Francetic(2)
—
—
—
—
8,000
—
Entities associated with Globespan
Capital Partners(3)
—
3,496,000
—
1,384,681
752,392
—
Entities associated with Granite
Global Ventures II L.P.(4)
—
—
—
—
2,491,694
—
Moran Family 2003 Revocable Trust(5)
—
—
—
—
8,000
—
Entities affiliated with New
Enterprise Associates (6)
Ms. Wienbar, one of our
directors, is a member of BA Venture Partners VI, LLC, the
general partner of BAVP, L.P. The voting and disposition of our
shares held by BAVP, L.P. are determined by the four managing
members of BA Venture Partners VI, LLC, the ultimate
general partner of BAVP, L.P. BAVP, L.P. is affiliated with Banc
of America Securities, LLC, a co-managing underwriter in this
offering. Sharon Wienbar, one of our directors, is one of the
members of BA Venture Partners VI, LLC.
(2)
Ms. Francetic is a former
director.
(3)
Mr. Schiffman, who served as
one of our directors from February 2006 until December 2006, is
(i) a managing member of JAV Management Associates III,
L.L.C., which is the general partner of JAFCO America Technology
Fund III, L.P., JAFCO America Technology Cayman
Fund III, L.P., JAFCO USIT Fund III L.P. and JAFCO
America Technology Affiliates Fund III, L.P., (ii) a
member of Globespan Management Associates IV, LLC, which is
(a) the general partner of Globespan Management
Associates IV, L.P., which is the general partner of
Globespan Capital Partners IV, L.P., JAFCO Globespan
USIT IV, L.P. and GCP IV Affiliates Fund, L.P. and the
managing limited partner of Globespan Capital Partners IV
GmbH & Co. KG, and (b) the general partner of
Globespan Management Associates (Cayman) IV, L.P., which is
the general partner of Globespan Capital Partners
(Cayman) IV, L.P., and (iii) a managing director of
Globespan Management Associates IV GmbH, which is the
general partner of Globespan Capital Partners IV
GmbH & Co. KG. Barry Schiffman is also a limited
partner of each of Globespan Management Associates IV, L.P.
and Globespan Management Associates (Cayman) IV, L.P. Jon
Callaghan, who served as one of our directors from
April 2003 until February 2006, (i) a
non-managing member of JAV Management Associates III,
L.L.C., which is the general partner of JAFCO America Technology
Fund III, L.P., JAFCO America Technology Cayman
Fund III, L.P., JAFCO USIT Fund III L.P. and JAFCO
America Technology Affiliates Fund III, L.P., (ii) a
limited partner of Globespan Management Associates IV,
L.P., which is the general partner of Globespan Capital
Partners IV, L.P., JAFCO Globespan USIT IV, L.P. and
GCP IV Affiliates Fund, L.P. and the managing limited
partner of Globespan Capital Partners IV GmbH &
Co. KG, and (iii) a limited partner of Globespan Management
Associates (Cayman) IV, L.P., was which is the general
partner of Globespan Capital Partners (Cayman) IV, L.P., at
the time of the purchase of these securities.
(4)
Mr. Nada, who served as one of
our directors from April 2005 until December 2006, is
a Managing Director of Granite Global Ventures II L.L.C.,
the general partner of Granite Global Ventures II L.P. and
GGV II Entrepreneurs Fund L.P.
(5)
Mr. Moran, one of our
directors, is a trustee of the Moran Family 2003 Revocable Trust.
(6)
Mr. Seawell, one of our
directors, is a Venture Partner of NEA Development Corp., an
entity that provides administrative services to New Enterprise
Associates 10 L.P. and NEA Ventures 2001, L.P.
Mr. Alsop, who served as one of our director from December
2001 until June 2006, was a General Partner of NEA
Partners 10, Limited Partnership, the general partner of
New Enterprise Associates 10 L.P. at the time of the
transactions.
(7)
Mr. Skaff, one of our
directors, is the Managing Member of Sienna Associates III,
L.L.C., the general partner of Sienna Limited Partnership III,
L.P.
(8)
Mr. Heller, who served as one
of our directors from July 2005 to December 2006, is
the President of Domestic Distribution of Turner Broadcasting
Systems, Inc., an affiliate of TWI Glu Mobile Holdings Inc. For
a description of our commercial relationships with other
entities affiliated with TWI Glu Mobile Holdings Inc., please
see “Transactions with Entities Affiliated with Time Warner
Inc.” below.
Acquisition of
Macrospace
In December 2004, we acquired Macrospace Limited, a company
registered in England and Wales, in exchange for approximately
$3.6 million in cash, approximately $1.1 million in
promissory notes and 8,199,233 shares of our common stock.
In connection with that transaction, Kristian Segerstråle,
who
became one of our executive officers following the acquisition
of Macrospace, received 1,209,989 shares of our common
stock, $331,721 of cash and $221,147 of promissory notes.
Common Stock
Transaction
In April 2005, we sold an aggregate of 249,169 shares of
our common stock at a purchase price of $1.00 per share for
an aggregate purchase price of $249,169 to entities affiliated
with Granite Global Ventures. Mr. Nada, who has served as
one of our directors since April 2005, is a Managing Director of
Granite Global Ventures II L.L.C., the general partner of
Granite Global Ventures II L.P. and GGV II
Entrepreneurs Fund L.P.
Acquisition of
iFone
In March 2006, we acquired all of the capital stock of iFone
Holdings Limited, a company registered in England and Wales, in
exchange for approximately $5.0 million in cash and
10,267,879 shares of our Special Junior Preferred Stock.
David C. Ward, an officer and member of the board of directors
of iFone prior to the acquisition and one of our directors
following the acquisition, received 3,956,851 shares of our
Special Junior Preferred Stock and $1,348,767 in cash.
Mr. Ward resigned from our board of directors in December
2006.
Transactions with
Entities Affiliated with Time Warner Inc.
In March 2004, Macrospace entered into a Services Agreement with
Turner Broadcasting System Europe Limited, The Cartoon Network
LP, Turner Broadcasting System Asia Pacific, Inc. and Turner
Broadcasting System Latin America, Inc. These parties along with
Turner Entertainment Networks Asia, Inc. amended the Services
Agreement in May 2005 and April 2006. Mr. Heller, who
served as one of our directors from July 2005 until December
2006, is the President of Domestic Distribution of Turner
Broadcasting Systems, Inc., an affiliate of the foregoing
entities. We believe that these transactions were entered into
on terms consistent with the terms offered to unrelated
third-party licensing partners.
Transaction with
Banc of America Securities LLC
Banc of America Securities LLC is a co-managing underwriter of
this offering. Ms. Wienbar, one of our directors, is a
member of the general partner of BAVP, L.P., which owns
more than 5% of our capital stock, and an employee of Bank of
America, National Association, each of which is an affiliate of
Banc of America Securities LLC.
Review, Approval
or Ratification of Transactions with Related Parties
Our policy and the charters of our nominating and governance
committee and our audit committee adopted by our board of
directors on December 13, 2006 require that any transaction
with a related party that must be reported under applicable
rules of the SEC, other than compensation-related matters, must
be reviewed and approved or ratified by our nominating and
governance committee, unless the related party is, or is
associated with, a member of that committee, in which event the
transaction must be reviewed and approved by our audit
committee. These committees have not adopted policies or
procedures for review of, or standards for approval of, these
transactions.
The following table presents information regarding the
beneficial ownership of our common stock as of December 15,2006, and as adjusted to reflect our sale of common stock in
this offering, by:
•
each stockholder known by us to be the beneficial owner of more
than 5% of our common stock;
•
each of our directors;
•
each of our named executive officers; and
•
all of our directors and executive officers as a group.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the SEC and thus represents voting or investment power with
respect to our securities. Unless otherwise indicated below, to
our knowledge, the persons and entities named in the table have
sole voting and sole investment power with respect to all shares
beneficially owned, subject to community property laws where
applicable. Shares of our common stock subject to options or
warrants that are currently exercisable or exercisable within
60 days of December 15, 2006 are deemed to be
outstanding and to be beneficially owned by the person holding
the options or warrants for the purpose of computing the
percentage ownership of that person but are not treated as
outstanding for the purpose of computing the percentage
ownership of any other person.
Percentage ownership of our common stock before this offering is
based on 63,392,183 shares of our common stock outstanding
as of December 15, 2006, which includes
47,040,945 shares of common stock resulting from the
automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred
stock upon the completion of this offering, as if this
conversion had occurred as of December 15, 2006. Percentage
ownership of our common stock after this offering also assumes
our sale of
the shares
in this offering. Unless otherwise indicated, the address of
each of the individuals and entities named below is c/o Glu
Mobile Inc., 1800 Gateway Drive, Second Floor, San Mateo,
California94404.
Number of
Shares
Percentage of
Outstanding
Beneficially
Shares
Beneficially Owned
Name
of Beneficial Owner
Owned
Before
Offering
After
Offering
5% Stockholders:
New Enterprise Associates and
affiliated entities(1)
14,456,388
22.8
%
%
BAVP, L.P.(2)
7,202,459
11.4
Globespan Capital Partners and
affiliated entities(3)
5,633,073
8.9
Sienna Limited
Partnership III, L.P.(4)
4,709,217
7.4
David C. Ward
4,073,802
6.4
Scott S. Orr(5)
3,679,610
5.8
Directors and Executive
Officers:
L. Gregory Ballard(6)
2,650,000
4.1
Albert A. “Rocky”
Pimentel(7)
822,882
1.3
Jill S. Braff(8)
342,937
*
*
Alessandro Galvagni(9)
430,000
*
*
Kristian Segerstråle
1,209,989
1.9
Ann Mather(10)
225,000
*
*
Richard A. Moran(11)
233,000
*
*
Hany M. Nada(12)
2,859,234
4.5
A. Brooke Seawell(13)
60,000
*
*
Daniel L. Skaff(4)
4,709,217
7.4
Sharon L. Wienbar(14)
—
—
—
All 11 directors and executive
officers as a group(15)
Represents beneficial ownership of less than 1% of our
outstanding shares of our common stock.
(1)
Represents 14,225,232 shares held by New Enterprise
Associates 10 L.P., 73,052 shares held by NEA Ventures
2001, L.P. and 158,104 shares subject to immediately
exercisable warrants held by New Enterprise Associates 10 L.P.
NEA Partners 10, L.P., which has eight individual general
partners, is the general partner of New Enterprise Associates 10
L.P. Pamela J. Clark is the general partner of NEA Ventures
2001, L.P. See footnote (12) regarding the relationship
between this securityholder and Mr. Seawell. The address of
New Enterprise Associates is 2490 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park,
California94025.
(2)
BAVP, L.P. is affiliated with Banc of America Securities LLC, a
co-managing underwriter of this offering. The voting and
disposition of our shares held by BAVP, L.P. are determined by
the four managing members of BA Venture Partners VI,
LLC, the ultimate general partner of BAVP, L.P. See
footnote (13) regarding the relationship between this
securityholder and Ms. Wienbar. The address of BAVP, L.P.
is 950 Tower Lane, Suite 700, Foster City, California94404.
(3)
Represents 1,601,156 shares held by JAFCO America
Technology Fund III, L.P., 1,461,031 shares held by
JAFCO America Technology Cayman Fund III, L.P.,
1,436,041 shares held by Globespan Capital Partners IV,
L.P., 706,658 shares held by JAFCO USIT Fund III L.P.,
174,309 shares held by JAFCO America Technology Affiliates
Fund III, L.P., 98,729 shares held by Globespan
Capital Partners (Cayman) IV, L.P., 88,925 shares held by
JAFCO Globespan USIT IV, L.P., 39,127 shares held by
Globespan Capital Partners IV GmbH & Co. KG and
27,097 shares held by GCP IV Affiliates Fund, L.P. The
address of Globespan Capital Partners is 300 Hamilton Avenue,
Top Floor, Palo Alto, California94301.
(4)
Includes 52,702 shares subject to immediately exercisable
warrants. Mr. Skaff is the Managing Member of Sienna
Associates III, L.L.C., the general partner of Sienna
Limited Partnership III, L.P. Mr. Skaff disclaims
beneficial ownership of these shares except to the extent of his
individual pecuniary interest in this entity. The address of
Sienna Limited Partnership III, L.P. and Mr. Skaff is
2330 Marinship Way, Suite 130, Sausalito, California94965.
Includes 1,516,667 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006, of
which 975,000 shares, if these options were exercised in
full, would be subject to vesting and a right of repurchase in
our favor upon Mr. Ballard’s cessation of service
prior to vesting, and 80,000 shares held by
Mr. Ballard’s minor children.
(7)
Includes 137,758 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006 and
299,741 shares subject to our right of repurchase, which
right lapses as to 14,273 shares each succeeding month over
the next 21 months.
(8)
Represents 342,937 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006, of
which 85,418 shares, if these options were exercised in
full, would be subject to vesting and a right of repurchase in
our favor upon Ms. Braff’s cessation of service prior
to vesting.
(9)
Includes 330,000 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006, of
which 82,501 shares, if these options were exercised in
full, would be subject to vesting and a right of repurchase in
our favor upon Mr. Galvagni’s cessation of service
prior to vesting.
(10)
Represents 225,000 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006, of
which 137,500 shares, if these options were exercised in
full, would be subject to vesting and a right of repurchase in
our favor upon Ms. Mather’s cessation of service prior
to vesting.
Includes 45,000 shares subject to options that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 15, 2006, all
of which, if these options were exercised in full, would be
subject to vesting and a right of repurchase in our favor upon
Mr. Moran’s cessation of service prior to vesting, and
8,000 shares held by the Moran Family 2003 Revocable Trust.
(12)
Represents 2,803,479 shares held by Granite Global
Ventures II L.P. and 55,755 shares held by GGV II
Entrepreneurs Fund L.P. Mr. Nada is a managing
director of the general partner of the foregoing entities, which
has seven individual managing directors, and shares voting and
investment power with respect to the shares held by these
entities with the other managing directors of the general
partners. Mr. Nada disclaims beneficial ownership of these
shares except to the extent of his individual pecuniary
interests in these entities.
(13)
Excludes 14,225,232 shares held by New Enterprise
Associates 10 L.P., 73,052 shares held by NEA Ventures
2001, L.P. and 158,104 shares subject to immediately
exercisable warrants held by New Enterprise Associates 10 L.P.
Mr. Seawell is a Venture Partner of NEA Development Corp.,
an entity that provides administrative services to the foregoing
entities. Mr. Seawell does not have voting or dispositive
power with respect to any of the shares held by New Enterprise
Associates 10, L.P or NEA Ventures 2001, L.P., and
disclaims beneficial ownership of any securities held by them,
except to the extent of his respective proportionate pecuniary
interests therein.
(14)
Excludes 7,202,459 shares held by BAVP, L.P. The voting and
disposition of our shares held by BAVP, L.P. are determined by
the four individual managing members of BA Venture
Partners VI, LLC, the ultimate general partner of BAVP,
L.P. BAVP, L.P. is affiliated with Banc of America Securities,
LLC, a co-managing underwriter in this offering. Sharon Wienbar,
one of our directors, is one of the members of BA Venture
Partners VI, LLC but does not share voting or dispositive
power for shares of our common stock.
(15)
Includes 299,741 shares subject to our right of repurchase,
which right lapses as to 14,273 shares each succeeding
month over the next 21 months and 2,597,362 shares
subject to options that are exercisable with 60 days of
December 15, 2006, of which 1,325,419 shares, if these
options were exercised in full, would be subject to vesting and
right of repurchase in our favor upon the executive
officer’s cessation of service prior to vesting. Excludes
the shares indicated to be excluded in footnotes (13) and
(14).
Upon the completion of this offering, our authorized capital
stock will consist of 250,000,000 shares of common stock,
$0.0001 par value per share, and 5,000,000 shares of
undesignated preferred stock, $0.0001 par value per share.
The following description summarizes the most important terms of
our capital stock. Because it is only a summary, it does not
contain all the information that may be important to you. For a
complete description, you should refer to our restated
certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws, which are
included as exhibits to the registration statement of which this
prospectus forms a part, and to the provisions of applicable
Delaware law.
Common
Stock
As of September 30, 2006, there were 63,169,489 shares
of our common stock outstanding, held by 145 stockholders of
record, and no shares of our preferred stock outstanding,
assuming the conversion of all outstanding shares of our
preferred stock into shares of our common stock, which will
occur immediately upon the completion of this offering. After
this offering, there will
be
shares of our common stock outstanding,
or shares
if the underwriters exercise in full their option to purchase
additional shares of our common stock in this offering.
Dividend Rights. Subject to preferences
that may apply to shares of our preferred stock outstanding at
the time, the holders of outstanding shares of our common stock
are entitled to receive dividends out of funds legally available
at the times and in the amounts that our board of directors may
determine.
Voting Rights. Each holder of our
common stock is entitled to one vote for each share of common
stock held on all matters submitted to a vote of stockholders.
Cumulative voting for the election of directors is not provided
for in our restated certificate of incorporation, which means
that the holders of a majority of our shares of common stock
voted can elect all of the directors then standing for election.
No Preemptive or Similar Rights. Our
common stock is not entitled to preemptive rights and is not
subject to conversion or redemption.
Right to Receive Liquidation
Distributions. Upon our liquidation,
dissolution or
winding-up,
the assets legally available for distribution to our
stockholders would be distributable ratably among the holders of
our common stock and any participating preferred stock
outstanding at that time after payment of liquidation
preferences, if any, on any outstanding shares of our preferred
stock and payment of other claims of creditors.
Fully Paid and Nonassessable. All of
our outstanding shares of common stock are, and the shares of
our common stock to be issued in this offering will be, fully
paid and non-assessable.
Preferred
Stock
Following this offering, our board of directors will be
authorized, subject to limitations prescribed by Delaware law,
to issue preferred stock in one or more series, to establish
from time to time the number of shares to be included in each
series, to fix the designation, powers, preferences and rights
of the shares of each series and any of its qualifications,
limitations or restrictions, in each case without further action
by our stockholders. Our board of directors can also increase or
decrease the number of shares of any series of our preferred
stock, but not below the number of shares of that series then
outstanding, unless approved by the affirmative vote of the
holders of a majority of our capital stock entitled to vote, or
such other vote as may be required by the certificate of
designation establishing the series. Our board of directors may
authorize the issuance of preferred stock with voting or
conversion rights that could adversely affect the voting power
or other rights of the holders of our common stock. The issuance
of preferred stock, while providing flexibility in connection
with possible acquisitions and other corporate purposes, could,
among other things, have the effect of delaying, deferring or
preventing a change in our control and might adversely affect
the market price
of our common stock and the voting and other rights of the
holders of our common stock. We have no current plan to issue
any shares of our preferred stock.
Warrants
As of September 30, 2006, we had outstanding warrants to
purchase 212,036 shares of our Series B Preferred
Stock with an exercise price of $0.64 and an expiration date of
March 7, 2008, a warrant to purchase 156,250 shares of
Series B Preferred Stock with an exercise price of $0.64
and an expiration date of the earlier of the date we undergo a
merger or consolidation meeting certain conditions or
March 31, 2011 and warrants to purchase 318,937 shares
of our Series D Preferred Stock with an exercise price of
$3.01 and an expiration date of May 2, 2013. Following the
completion of this offering, any of the warrants that remain
outstanding will become exercisable for a like number of shares
of our common stock.
Registration
Rights
Pursuant to the terms of our amended and restated
investors’ rights agreement, immediately following this
offering, the holders of approximately 47,571,918 shares of
our common stock outstanding as of September 30, 2006 or
subject to warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2006
will be entitled to rights with respect to the registration of
these shares under the Securities Act, as described below.
Demand Registration Rights. At any time
beginning six months after the completion of this offering, the
holders of at least 30% of the shares having registration rights
can request that we file a registration statement covering
registrable securities with an anticipated aggregate offering
price of at least $7.5 million. We will only be required to
file two registration statements upon exercise of these demand
registration rights. We may postpone the filing of a
registration statement for up to 120 days once in a
12-month
period if we determine that the filing would be seriously
detrimental to us and our stockholders.
Piggyback Registration Rights. If we
register any of our securities for public sale, holders of
shares having registration rights, as well as the holder of a
warrant to purchase an additional 156,250 shares of our
common stock, will have the right to include their shares in the
registration statement. However, this right does not apply to a
registration relating to any of our employee benefit plans, a
registration relating to a corporate reorganization or
acquisition or a registration in which the only equity security
being registered is common stock issuable upon conversion of
convertible debt securities that are also being registered. The
managing underwriter of any underwritten offering will have the
right, in its sole discretion, to limit, because of marketing
reasons, the number of shares registered by these holders, in
which case the number of shares to be registered will be
apportioned pro rata among these holders, according to the total
amount of securities entitled to be included by each holder, or
in a manner mutually agreed upon by the holders. However, the
number of shares to be registered by these holders cannot be
reduced below 25% of the total shares covered by the
registration statement unless no other stockholder’s shares
are included in the registration statement.
Form S-3
Registration Rights. The holders of at least
10% of the shares with registration rights can request that we
register their shares on
Form S-3
if we are eligible to file a registration statement on
Form S-3
and if the aggregate price to the public of the shares offered
is at least $1.0 million. The stockholders may only require
us to file three registration statements on
Form S-3
in a
12-month
period. We may postpone the filing of a registration statement
on
Form S-3
for up to 120 days once in a
12-month
period if we determine that the filing would be seriously
detrimental to us and our stockholders.
Expenses of Registration Rights. We
will pay all expenses, other than underwriting discounts,
commissions and stock transfer taxes, incurred in connection
with the registrations described above, except for the expenses
incurred pursuant to the third registration following the
exercise of the
Form S-3
registration rights described above in a
12-month
period.
Expiration of Registration Rights. The
registration rights described above will expire, with respect to
any particular holder of these rights on the earlier of the
fourth anniversary of the completion of this offering or when
that holder owns registrable securities constituting 1% or less
of our outstanding voting stock and can sell all of its
registrable securities in any three-month period under
Rule 144 promulgated under of the Securities Act. In
addition, the registration rights described above will expire
with respect to all holders on the date of a bona fide
acquisition of our company.
Anti-Takeover
Provisions
The provisions of Delaware law, our restated certificate of
incorporation and our restated bylaws may have the effect of
delaying, deferring or discouraging another person from
acquiring control of our company.
Delaware Law. We are governed by the
provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law. In general, Section 203 prohibits a public
Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business
combination” with an “interested stockholder” for
a period of three years after the date of the transaction in
which the person became an interested stockholder, unless the
business combination is approved in a prescribed manner. A
“business combination” includes mergers, asset sales
or other transactions resulting in a financial benefit to the
stockholder. An “interested stockholder” is a person
who, together with affiliates and associates, owns, or within
three years did own, 15% or more of the corporation’s
outstanding voting stock. These provisions may have the effect
of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in our control.
Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Restated Bylaw
Provisions. We anticipate that our restated
certificate of incorporation and our restated bylaws will
include a number of provisions that may have the effect of
deterring hostile takeovers or delaying or preventing changes in
control of our management team, including the following:
•
Board of Directors Vacancies. We anticipate
that our restated certificate of incorporation and restated
bylaws will authorize only our board of directors to fill vacant
directorships. In addition, the number of directors constituting
our board of directors may be set only by resolution adopted by
a majority vote of our entire board of directors. These
provisions prevent a stockholder from increasing the size of our
board of directors and gaining control of our board of directors
by filling the resulting vacancies with its own nominees.
•
Classified Board. We anticipate that our
restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws will
provide that our board is classified into three classes of
directors. The existence of a classified board could delay a
successful tender offeror from obtaining majority control of our
board of directors, and the prospect of that delay might deter a
potential offeror.
•
Stockholder Action; Special Meeting of
Stockholders. We anticipate that our restated
certificate of incorporation will provide that our stockholders
may not take action by written consent, but may only take action
at annual or special meetings of our stockholders. Stockholders
will not be permitted to cumulate their votes for the election
of directors. We anticipate that our restated bylaws will
further provide that special meetings of our stockholders may be
called only by a majority of our board of directors, our lead
independent director, our chief executive officer or our
president.
•
Advance Notice Requirements for Stockholder Proposals and
Director Nominations. We anticipate that our
restated bylaws will provide advance notice procedures for
stockholders seeking to bring business before our annual meeting
of stockholders, or to nominate candidates for election as
directors at our annual meeting of stockholders. We anticipate
that our restated bylaws also will specify certain requirements
regarding the form and content of a stockholder’s notice.
These provisions may preclude our stockholders from bringing
matters before our annual meeting of stockholders or from making
nominations for directors at our annual meeting of stockholders.
Issuance of Undesignated Preferred Stock. We
anticipate that, after the filing of our restated certificate of
incorporation, our board of directors will have the authority,
without further action by the stockholders, to issue up to
5,000,000 shares of undesignated preferred stock with
rights and preferences, including voting rights, designated from
time to time by our board of directors. The existence of
authorized but unissued shares of preferred stock enables our
board of directors to render more difficult or to discourage an
attempt to obtain control of us by means of a merger, tender
offer, proxy contest or otherwise.
NASDAQ Global
Market Listing
We have applied for listing of our common stock on The NASDAQ
Global Market under the symbol “GLUU.”
Transfer Agent
and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock
is .
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock, and we cannot predict the effect, if any, that
market sales of shares of our common stock or the availability
of shares of our common stock for sale will have on the market
price of our common stock prevailing from time to time.
Nevertheless, sales of substantial amounts of our common stock,
including shares issued upon exercise of outstanding options or
warrants, in the public market after this offering could
adversely affect market prices prevailing from time to time and
could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of
our equity securities.
Upon the completion of this offering, based on the number of
shares outstanding as of September 30, 2006, we will
have shares
of our common stock outstanding. Of these outstanding shares,
all of
the
shares sold in this offering will be freely tradable, except
that any shares held by our affiliates, as that term is defined
in Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act, may only
be sold in compliance with the limitations described below.
The remaining outstanding shares of our common stock will be
deemed restricted securities as defined under Rule 144.
Restricted securities may be sold in the public market only if
registered or if they qualify for an exemption from registration
under Rule 144 or Rule 701 promulgated under the
Securities Act, which rules are summarized below. In addition,
all of our stockholders have entered into market standoff
agreements with us or
lock-up
agreements with the underwriters under which they agreed,
subject to specific exceptions, not to sell any of their stock
for at least 180 days following the date of this
prospectus. Subject to the provisions of Rule 144 or
Rule 701, based on an assumed offering date of
March 30, 2007, shares will be available for sale in the
public market as follows:
•
Beginning 180 days after the date of this prospectus,
61,532,158 additional shares will become eligible for sale in
the public market, of which 12,620,129 shares will be
freely tradable under Rule 144(k), 329,767 shares will
be freely tradeable under Rule 701, 42,796,075 shares
will be held by affiliates and subject to the volume and other
restrictions of Rule 144, as described below, and the
remaining 5,786,187 shares will be held by non-affiliates
and subject to the volume and other restrictions of
Rule 144; and
•
The remaining 1,637,331 shares will become eligible for
sale from time to time thereafter.
Lock-Up
Agreements
All of our directors and officers and all of our security
holders are subject to
lock-up
agreements or market standoff provisions that prohibit them from
offering for sale, selling, contracting to sell, granting any
option for the sale of, transferring or otherwise disposing of
any shares of our common stock, options or warrants to acquire
shares of our common stock or any security or instrument related
to our common stock, options or warrants for a period of at
least 180 days following the date of this prospectus
without the prior written consent of Goldman, Sachs &
Co.
Rule 144
In general, under Rule 144 as currently in effect,
beginning 90 days after the date of this prospectus, a
person, or group of persons whose shares are required to be
aggregated, who has beneficially owned shares for at least one
year, is entitled to sell within any three-month period a number
of shares that does not exceed the greater of 1% of the then
outstanding shares of our common stock or the average weekly
trading volume in our common stock during the four calendar
weeks preceding the date on which notice of the sale is filed.
In addition, a person who is not deemed to have been an
affiliate at any time during the three months preceding a sale
and who has beneficially owned the shares proposed to be sold
for at least two years would be entitled to sell those shares
under Rule 144(k) without regard to the requirements
described above. When a person acquires shares from one of our
affiliates, that person’s holding period for the purpose of
effecting a sale under Rule 144 would commence on the date
of transfer from the affiliate. Any shares that would
otherwise be eligible for sale under Rule 144 are subject
to the market standoff
and/or
lock-up
agreements described above and will only become eligible for
sale upon the expiration or waiver of those agreements.
Rule 701
In general, under Rule 701, an employee, officer, director,
consultant or advisor who purchased shares from us in connection
with a compensatory stock or option plan or other written
agreement in compliance with Rule 701 is eligible,
90 days after we become subject to the reporting
requirements of the Exchange Act, to resell those shares in
reliance on Rule 144, but without compliance with certain
restrictions, including the holding period, contained in
Rule 144. However, the shares issued pursuant to
Rule 701 are subject to the market standoff
and/or
lock-up
agreements described above and will only become eligible for
sale upon the expiration or waiver of those agreements.
Registration of
Shares Issued Pursuant to Benefits Plans
We intend to file a registration statement under the Securities
Act as promptly as possible after the date of this prospectus to
register shares that we have issued or may issue pursuant to our
employee benefit plans. As a result, the shares resulting from
any options or rights exercised under our 2001 Stock Option
Plan, our 2006 Equity Incentive Plan or our 2006 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan after the filing of this registration statement
will also be freely tradable in the public market, subject to
the market standoff and
lock-up
agreements discussed above. However, shares acquired by
affiliates under these employee benefit plans will still be
subject to the volume limitation, manner of sale, notice and
public information requirements of Rule 144. As of
September 30, 2006, there were outstanding options under
our 2001 Stock Option Plan for the purchase of
8,158,311 shares of our common stock.
Registration
Rights
Pursuant to the terms of our amended and restated
investors’ rights agreement, holders of approximately
47,728,168 shares of our common stock outstanding as of
September 30, 2006 or subject to warrants outstanding as of
September 30, 2006 have registration rights with respect to
those shares of common stock. For a discussion of these rights,
please see “Description of Capital Stock —
Registration Rights.” After any of these shares are
registered, they will be freely tradable without restriction
under the Securities Act.
The company and the underwriters named below have entered into
an underwriting agreement with respect to the shares being
offered. Subject to certain conditions, each underwriter has