SEC Info℠

Home

Search

My Interests

Help

Sign In

Please Sign In

Suntron Corp – ‘10-K’ for 12/31/02

On:  Tuesday, 4/15/03, at 5:29pm ET   ·   For:  12/31/02   ·   Accession #:  950153-3-721   ·   File #:  0-49651

Previous ‘10-K’:  ‘10-K’ on 4/1/02 for 12/31/01   ·   Next:  ‘10-K’ on 3/29/04 for 12/31/03   ·   Latest:  ‘10-K/A’ on 4/30/07 for 12/31/06

in

this entire Filing. an “Entity” Search.

Show

Documents searched

and

each “hit”. the 1st “hit”.

↓↑Hints

 Text Wildcards:  ? (any letter/digit),  * (many).  Search Logic:  for Documents:  & (and),  | (or);  for Text:  | (anywhere),  "(&)" (near).  Details... 

  As Of                Filer                Filing    For·On·As Docs:Size              Issuer               Agent

 4/15/03  Suntron Corp                      10-K       12/31/02    7:1.0M                                   Bowne - BPX/FA

Document/Exhibit                   Description                      Pages   Size 

 1: 10-K        Annual Report                                       HTML    910K 
 2: EX-10.1     Material Contract                                     15     74K 
 3: EX-21       Subsidiaries of the Registrant                         1      6K 
 4: EX-23.1     Consent of Experts or Counsel                          1      8K 
 5: EX-23.2     Consent of Experts or Counsel                          1      4K 
 6: EX-99.1     Miscellaneous Exhibit                                  1      6K 
 7: EX-99.2     Miscellaneous Exhibit                                  1      6K 

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

FORM 10-K

Commission file number 0-49651

SUNTRON CORPORATION

2501 West Grandview Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85023

(602) 789-6600

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

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

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

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

     Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2). Yes o No þ

     The aggregate market value of the outstanding common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, computed as of June 28, 2002, which was the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was $21.1 million. This amount is based on 2,496,000 shares held by non-affiliates. For purposes of this computation, all officers, directors, and 10% beneficial owners of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such determination should not be deemed to be an admission that such officers, directors, or 10% beneficial owners are, in fact, affiliates of the registrant.

     As of March 31, 2003, there were outstanding 27,409,338 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $0.01 par value.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

SUNTRON CORPORATION

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements regarding future events or our future financial and operational performance. Forward-looking statements include statements regarding markets for our products; trends in net sales, gross profits, and estimated expense levels; liquidity and anticipated cash needs and availability; and any statement that contains the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “plan,” “estimate,” “expect,” “seek,” and other similar expressions. The forward-looking statements included in this report reflect our current expectations and beliefs, and we do not undertake publicly to update or revise these statements, even if experience or future changes make it clear that any projected results expressed in this report, annual or quarterly reports to stockholders, press releases, or company statements will not be realized. In addition, the inclusion of any statement in this report does not constitute an admission by us that the events or circumstances described in such statement are material. Furthermore, we wish to caution and advise readers that these statements are based on assumptions that may not materialize and may involve risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, that could cause actual events or performance to differ materially from those contained or implied in these forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, risks related to the realization of anticipated revenue, profitability, and synergies of the recent business combinations; the ability to meet cost estimates and achieve the expected benefits associated with planned restructuring activities; trends affecting our growth; and the business and economic risks described herein under “Factors That May Affect Future Results.”

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1.      BUSINESS

Overview

     Suntron Corporation is a provider of vertically integrated electronics manufacturing solutions supplying high-mix services that target the aerospace and defense, semiconductor capital equipment, industrial controls, instrumentation, medical, networking, and telecommunications industries. Our manufacturing services include printed circuit card assembly, cable and harness production, plastic injection molding, sheet metal, engineering services, full systems integration, testing, and after-market repair and warranty services. We offer original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, the ability to outsource all stages of the product life cycle, including development and design, materials procurement and supply chain management, prototyping, manufacturing and assembly, testing, quality control, and after-market support. High-mix manufacturing involves processing assemblies in small lots (generally less than 100 assemblies per production run) in a flexible manufacturing environment. We believe that our success in the marketplace is primarily attributable to our ability to provide intelligent solutions tailored to match customer requirements, while meeting the highest quality standards in the industry.

     Suntron was formed as a holding company for the purpose of effecting the business combination of EFTC Corporation and K*TEC Operating Company, L.L.C. (formerly known as Thayer-Blum Funding II, L.L.C.) and its wholly owned subsidiary, K*TEC Electronics Holding Corporation (referred to together as K*TEC). The combination of EFTC and K*TEC was completed on February 28, 2002 and, in connection with the combination, EFTC and K*TEC each became a wholly owned subsidiary of Suntron. As a result of the combination, the former holder of membership interests in K*TEC received 15,119,356 shares of Suntron common stock, representing approximately 55% of our outstanding shares, and the former shareholders of EFTC received .25 shares of Suntron common stock for each share of EFTC common stock, or an aggregate of 12,290,032 shares, representing the approximately 45% balance of our outstanding shares.

     The combination was accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control. Accordingly, our financial statements have been retroactively adjusted to present the combined results of EFTC since its inception and K*TEC since October 10, 2000 (the date that common control was established).

Manufacturing Services

     We provide a variety of manufacturing services including printed circuit board assembly and testing, electronic interconnect assemblies, subassemblies, sheet metal fabrication and powder paint, plastic injection molding, and full systems integration (known as box build), after-market repair and warranty services, and engineering and design services. Our competitive strengths include our ability to manufacture highly complex products in short cycle times with smaller lot sizes. Our strategy targets capturing turnkey work by providing customers with support throughout the entire manufacturing process, starting with prototype design for manufacturability all the way through material procurement, supply chain management, final assembly, and testing, to reduce our customers’ costs and improve their time to market. We provide the following services:

     Design Services. We provide our customers product development and design and test engineering services. Our design for manufacturability and design for testability reviews allow our engineering group to collaborate with our customers early in the design process to reduce variation, cost, and complexity in new designs. Following completion of the initial design, we also offer design services to assist our customers in taking their product to market. Our support teams work closely with our customers through all stages of product planning and production. Our computer systems feature a computer-aided design capability that allows our engineers to collaborate online with a customer’s engineers when developing and changing product designs.

     Prototype Manufacturing Services. We provide quick-turn prototype manufacturing services that provide customers with 24 hour to 10-day turnaround times. Our prototype manufacturing operations, located in Manchester, New Hampshire and Phoenix, Arizona, provide full turnkey solutions to support our customers with new product introduction activities. These services permit our customers to be more competitive by reducing the amount of time required to bring new products to market.

Table of Contents

     Materials and Supply Chain Management Services. We consult with our customers and their suppliers early in the component selection process. This early supplier involvement helps ensure an efficient supply stream that focuses not only on cost but also on availability of components and the component life cycle. When material obsolescence affects our customers’ designs, we can provide recommendations on alternative components through our component engineering group. We have developed innovative material planning relationships with a select group of OEMs in the aerospace and defense, semiconductor capital equipment, computer, medical instrumentation, networking, and telecommunications industries. These relationships are supported by sophisticated in-house product design and technical support capabilities. In addition, certain of our customers have internet access to our intranet in order to monitor printed circuit board production quality, board and box build assembly methods, and product throughput in a real-time environment. Each customer’s internet access is secured and tailored for the customer’s unique needs. We further complement our offerings by providing full logistics support that allows the final assembly to be shipped directly to the customer’s end user. This supply chain management ability differentiates us as a resource in enhancing customers’ cost-efficiency and time-to-market.

     Manufacturing and Assembly Services. We provide high-mix manufacturing services for a variety of highly complex electronic products. Our manufacturing methodology is central to supporting high-mix manufacturing. While typical high-volume manufacturing companies use high-volume runs to recover costs incurred in the initial set-up for the manufacturing process, our high-mix manufacturing technique focuses on parallel processing and set-up reductions in order to reduce initial set-up costs.

     Testing Services. We offer in-circuit functional testing and environmental “stress” testing that includes temperature and motion/shock/electronic cycle testing. These tests verify that components have been properly placed and electrical continuity exists at the proper places on the circuit card. Functional testing is performed on the in-circuit testers or separate test adapters and verifies that the board or system is in compliance with customer specifications. Environmental tests determine how the product will function at various temperatures and seeks to identify and remove any latent defects that might appear later in the product life cycle.

     Quality Control Services. Our quality control standards provide another means of serving the needs of our customers, because OEMs often rely on suppliers to assure quality control for subassemblies rather than providing such quality control themselves. We believe that our adherence to strict quality control standards and our investment in state-of-the-art production facilities and equipment have attracted and retained important customers that have established extremely rigid product quality standards.

     After-market Repair Services. We provide after-market warranty and repair services for electronic products, including products that may not have been originally manufactured by us, in support of customer product warranty, repair, and upgrade programs.

Customers

     Suntron focuses on serving OEMs in industries that have high-mix requirements. Sales to Honeywell International, Inc, Applied Materials, Inc. and Emulex Corporation represented approximately 42%, 22% and 9%, respectively, of our net sales for 2002. The loss of Honeywell, Applied Materials, or Emulex as a customer would, and the loss of any other significant customer could, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

     The following table presents Suntron’s net sales by industry segment for the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002:

2

Table of Contents

Sales and Marketing

     Our sales force develops close working relationships with customers beginning early in the design phase and throughout all stages of production. We focus our marketing efforts on developing long-term relationships with our customers’ key personnel.

     We continue to focus our sales and marketing efforts on the following markets: (1) aerospace and defense, (2) semiconductor capital equipment, (3) industrial controls and instrumentation, (4) networking and telecommunications equipment, and (5) medical equipment. This approach facilitates sales personnel specialization within related product groupings and permits sales representatives to develop a high degree of technical expertise.

     Our sales strategy is to target (1) technology companies with minimal manufacturing capabilities that require “one-stop shopping” service in rapidly evolving sectors and (2) OEMs in our target market that require the outsourcing services in which we specialize. Our vertical integration, coupled with our unique focus on the underserved high-mix needs of our customers, differentiates us from other electronics manufacturing services providers.

     We supplement the efforts of our sales force in the marketing of our services with direct mailings of brochures and other literature, the publication of various white papers, as well as advertisements in trade journals.

Backlog

     Although we obtain firm purchase orders from customers, most customers do not place firm purchase orders for products until 30 to 90 days prior to the delivery date for the finished goods. Backlog covered by firm purchase orders does not demonstrate a meaningful projection of our future sales because orders may be modified or canceled.

Suppliers

     We use numerous suppliers of electronic components and other materials for our operations. From time to time, some components we use have been subject to shortages, and suppliers have been forced to allocate available quantities among their customers. See Item 7 – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - “Factors that may affect future results - We are dependent on limited and sole source suppliers for electronic components and may experience component shortages, which would cause us to delay shipments to customers.” We attempt to mitigate the risks of component shortages by working with customers to delay delivery schedules or by working with suppliers to provide the needed components using just-in-time inventory programs.

Competition

     The electronics manufacturing services industry is extremely competitive and includes hundreds of companies. The contract manufacturing services we provide are available from many independent sources. Many of our competitors are more established in the industry and have substantially greater financial, manufacturing, or marketing resources than we do. Certain of our competitors have broader geographic presence than we do, including manufacturing facilities in Asia, Europe, and South America. We believe that the principal competitive factors in our targeted market are quality, reliability, ability to meet delivery schedules, technological sophistication, geographic location, and price. We also face competition from current and potential customers, which are continually evaluating the relative merits of internal manufacturing versus contract manufacturing for various products.

Intellectual Property

     We seek to protect our proprietary technology and other intangible assets primarily through trade secret protection. In addition, we depend heavily on training, recruiting, and retaining our employees, who are required to have sufficient know-how to operate advanced equipment and to conduct sensitive and complicated manufacturing processes.

3

Table of Contents

Governmental Regulation

     Our operations are subject to certain federal, state, and local regulatory requirements relating to environmental, waste management, and health and safety matters, and there can be no assurance that material costs and liabilities will not be incurred in complying with those regulations or that past or future operations will not result in exposure to injury or claims of injury by employees or the public. To meet various legal requirements, we have modified our circuit board cleaning processes to utilize only aqueous (water-based) methods.

     Some risk of liabilities related to these matters is inherent in our business, as with many similar businesses. Our management team believes that our business is operated in substantial compliance with applicable environmental, waste management, and health and safety regulations, the violation of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In the event of violation, these regulations provide for civil and criminal fines, injunctions, and other sanctions and, in certain instances, allow third parties to sue to enforce compliance. In addition, new, modified, or more stringent requirements or enforcement policies could be adopted that may adversely affect our business.

     We periodically generate and temporarily handle limited amounts of materials that are considered hazardous waste under applicable law. We engage independent contractors for the off-site disposal of these materials. For additional information, see Item 7 – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - “Factors That May Affect Future Results - Our failure to comply with the requirements of environmental laws could result in fines and revocation of permits necessary to our manufacturing processes.”

Employees

     As of March 14, 2003, we had 1,801 full-time equivalent employees, including 1,395 that were engaged in manufacturing operations, 197 in material handling and procurement, and 209 in finance, sales, and administration. As of the same date, we also engaged the full-time services of 338 temporary laborers through employment agencies. None of our employees is subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Our management team believes that the relationship with our employees is good.

Availability of Reports Filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission

     Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, registration statements, and amendments to those reports are available without charge on our website, http://www.suntroncorp.com/investor/index.html#, as soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed electronically with the SEC. Copies are also available without charge by (i) telephonic request by calling 1-888-520-3382, (ii) email request to ir@suntroncorp.com, or (iii) a written request to Suntron Corporation Investor Relations, 2501 West Grandview Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85023.

4

Table of Contents

ITEM 2.      PROPERTIES

     The following table describes locations where our material operations are conducted.

     In addition, we lease a building in Denver, Colorado where EFTC’s former executive offices were located. We have subleased a significant portion of this building and are actively pursuing a sublease for the remainder of the space. We also lease additional manufacturing facilities in Milpitas and Fremont, California and Plano, Texas, which we have closed. We have subleased a significant portion of our facilities in Milpitas, California and Plano, Texas and we are actively pursuing a sublease of the space in Fremont, California. We own a manufacturing facility in Ottawa, Kansas that we recently closed, and we are marketing this property for sale.

     We believe our facilities are in good condition and that our current capacity is sufficient to handle our anticipated needs for the foreseeable future.

ITEM 3.      LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

     There are no legal proceedings to which we are a party or to which any of our properties are subject, that we expect to have a material adverse effect on our company.

ITEM 4.      SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

     Not applicable.

5

Table of Contents

PART II

ITEM 5.      MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Market for Our Common Stock

     Our common stock has been listed on the Nasdaq National Market since March 1, 2002 under the symbol “SUNN”. The following table sets forth the low and high sale prices for the Company’s common stock, as reported on the Nasdaq National Market, for the period from March 1, 2002 through March 31, 2002, and for the last three fiscal quarters of 2002:

     As of March 31, 2003, there were approximately 530 holders of record of our common stock. The closing sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq National Market on March 31, 2003 was $3.41 per share.

Dividends

     Our senior credit facility prohibits the payment of dividends. Suntron has not declared or paid any dividends, and we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We presently intend to retain any future earnings to finance future operations and expansion of our business, and to reduce indebtedness.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

     Not applicable.

6

Table of Contents

ITEM 6.     SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

     The selected financial data presented below as of and for each of the years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2002, are derived from our consolidated financial statements (including financial statements of our predecessors, EFTC Corporation and K*TEC Electronics Holding Corporation) that have been audited by KPMG LLP and Arthur Andersen, LLP, independent certified public accountants. The consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2001 and 2002, and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2002, and the independent auditors’ reports thereon, are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

7

Table of Contents

8

Table of Contents

ITEM 7.     MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

     The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes, and the other financial information included in this report. This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including those set forth in “Factors That May Affect Future Results” below and elsewhere in this report.

Organization and Basis of Financial Presentation

     Suntron Corporation is a provider of vertically integrated electronics manufacturing solutions, supplying high-mix services for the aerospace and defense, semiconductor capital equipment, industrial controls, instrumentation, medical, networking, and telecommunications industries. Our manufacturing services include printed circuit card assembly, cable and harness production, plastic injection molding, sheet metal, engineering services, and full systems integration, testing, and after-market repair and warranty services. High-mix manufacturing involves processing small lots in a flexible manufacturing environment. Our success in the marketplace is a direct result of our ability to provide intelligent solutions tailored to match customer requirements, while meeting the highest quality standards in the industry.

     Suntron was formed as a holding company for the purpose of effecting the business combination of EFTC Corporation and K*TEC Operating Company, L.L.C. (formerly known as Thayer-Blum Funding II, L.L.C.) and its wholly owned subsidiary, K*TEC Electronics Holding Corporation. This business combination was completed on February 28, 2002 and, in connection with the combination, EFTC and K*TEC each became a wholly owned subsidiary of Suntron. As a result of the combination, the former holder of membership interests in K*TEC received 15,119,356 shares of Suntron common stock, and the former stockholders of EFTC received .25 shares of Suntron common stock for each share of EFTC common stock, resulting in the issuance of an additional 12,290,032 shares of Suntron common stock.

     The combination was accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control. Accordingly, our consolidated financial statements included herein have been retroactively restated to include the combined results of EFTC since its inception and K*TEC since October 10, 2000 (the date that common control was established).

Information About Our Business

     As an electronic manufacturing services company, many of our customers are original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, that have designed their own products. Our customers request proposals that include key terms such as quality, delivery, and the price to purchase the materials and perform the manufacturing services to make one or more components or assemblies. Generally, the component or assembly that we manufacture is delivered to the customer where it is then integrated into their final product. We price new business with our customers by obtaining raw material quotes from our suppliers and then estimating the amount of labor and overhead that will be required to make the products.

     Before we begin a customer relationship, we typically enter into arrangements that are intended to protect us in case a customer cancels an order after we purchase the raw materials to fill that order. In these circumstances, the customer is generally required to purchase the materials or reimburse us if we incur a loss from liquidating the raw materials.

     The electronics manufacturing services industry is extremely dynamic and our customers make frequent changes to their orders. The magnitude and frequency of these changes make it difficult to predict revenues beyond the next quarter, and even relatively short-term forecasts may prove inaccurate depending on changes in economic, political, and military factors, as well as unexpected customer requests to delay shipments near the end of our fiscal quarters. These changes in customer orders also cause substantial difficulties in managing inventories, which often leads to excess inventories and the need to recognize losses on inventories. However, from time to time, we may also have difficulties obtaining certain electronic components that are in short supply, which can result in a decision to purchase some materials before formal notice of demand is received from our customer. In addition, our inventories consist of over 150,000 different parts and many of these parts have limited alternative uses or markets,

9

Table of Contents

beyond the products that we manufacture for our customers. When we liquidate excess materials through an inventory broker or auction, we often realize less than the original cost of the materials, and in some cases we determine that there is no market for the excess materials.

     The most common reasons we incur losses related to inventories are if we purchase more materials than are necessary to meet a customer’s requirements or if we fail to act promptly to minimize losses once the customer communicates a cancellation. Occasionally it is not clear what action caused an inventory loss and there is a shared responsibility whereby our customers agree to negotiate a settlement with us. Accordingly, management continually evaluates inventory on-hand, forecasted demand, contractual protections, and net realizable values in order to determine whether an adjustment to the carrying amount of inventory is necessary. When the relationship with a customer terminates, we tend to be more vulnerable to inventory losses because the customer may be reluctant to accept responsibility for the remaining inventory if a product is at the end of its life cycle. We can also incur inventory losses if a customer becomes insolvent and the materials do not have alternative uses or markets into which we can sell them.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

     The discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements requires that we make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to bad debts, inventories, property, plant and equipment, intangible assets, income taxes, warranty obligations, restructuring-related obligations, and litigation. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. We cannot assure you that actual results will not differ from those estimates. We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

     Write-Downs for Obsolete and Slow-Moving Inventories. Our judgments about excess and obsolete inventories are especially difficult because (i) hundreds of different components may be associated with a single product we manufacture for a customer, (ii) we make numerous products for most of our customers, (iii) even though we are engaged in the electronic manufacturing services industry, most of our customers are engaged in diverse industries, and (iv) all of our customers experience dynamic business environments affected by a wide variety of economic, political, and regulatory factors. This complex environment results in positive and negative events that can change daily and which affect judgments about future demand for our manufacturing services and the amounts we can realize when it is not possible to liquidate inventories through production of finished products.

     We frequently review customer demand to determine if we have excess raw materials that will not be consumed in production. In determining demand we consider firm purchase orders and forecasts of demand submitted by our customers. If we determine that excess inventories exist and that the customer is not contractually obligated for the excess inventories, we need to make judgments about whether unforecasted demand for those materials is likely to occur or the amount we would likely realize in the sale of this material through a broker or auction. If we determine that future demand from the customer is unlikely, we write down our inventories to the extent that the cost of the inventory exceeds the estimated market value.

     If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required in future periods. Likewise, if we underestimate contractual recoveries from customers or future demand, hindsight may indicate that we over-reported our costs of goods sold in earlier periods, which results in the recognition of additional gross profit at the time the material is used in production and the related goods are sold. Therefore, although we make every effort to ensure the accuracy of our forecasts of future product demand, any significant unanticipated changes in demand or the outcome of customer negotiations with respect to the enforcement of contractual provisions, could have a significant impact on the value of our inventory and our reported operating results.

10

Table of Contents

     Allowance for Doubtful Accounts Receivable. We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments, as well as to provide for adjustments related to pricing and quantity differences. If the financial condition of our customers were to deteriorate, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make payments, additional allowances would be required.

     Impairment of Long-Lived Assets. When we undergo changes in our business, including the closure or relocation of facilities, we often have equipment and other long-lived assets that are no longer needed in continuing operations. When this occurs, we are required to estimate future cash flows and if such cash flows are less than the carrying value of the assets (or asset group, as applicable), we recognize impairment charges to reduce the carrying value to estimated fair value. The determination of future cash flows and fair value tend to be highly subjective estimates. When assets are held for sale and the actual market conditions deteriorate, or are less favorable than those projected by management, additional impairment charges may be required in subsequent periods.

     Effective January 1, 2002, we were required to adopt a new accounting standard that changed the method for evaluating impairment of goodwill. In order to comply with this standard we engaged an independent business valuation firm to determine the fair value of each reporting unit that had goodwill associated with it. The valuation of reporting units is a highly subjective process that can be influenced by a wide range of factors including historical and forecasted results for the reporting unit, interest rates, and political, regulatory, and economic conditions. Because of the volatility of these factors, a significant reduction in the value of a reporting unit may occur in a relatively short period of time, which could result in a material charge for impairment. Effective January 1, 2002, we implemented this new accounting standard and were required to recognize an impairment charge of $69.0 million related to the K*TEC reporting unit. We are required to evaluate potential impairment of goodwill related to other reporting units at least annually and, depending on changes in the fair value of those reporting units at future testing dates, we may need to recognize additional impairment losses that could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.

     Accrual of Lease Exit Costs. When we undertake restructuring activities and decide to close a plant that we occupy under a non-cancelable operating lease, we are required to estimate how long it will take to locate a new tenant to sublease the facility and to estimate the rate that we are likely to receive when a tenant is located. Accordingly, we will incur additional lease exit charges in future periods if our estimates of the rate or timing of sublease payments turns out to be less favorable than our current expectations. We also consider the estimated cost of building improvements, brokerage commissions, and any other costs we believe will be incurred in connection with the subleasing process. The precise outcome of most of these factors is difficult to predict. We review our estimates at least quarterly, including consultation with our commercial real estate advisors to assess changes in market conditions, feedback from parties that have expressed interest, and other information that we believe is relevant to most accurately reflect the expected outcome of obtaining a subtenant to lease the facility. Commercial real estate conditions are currently very poor in the areas that we are attempting to sublease closed facilities, and we believe our estimates have appropriately considered these conditions. As discussed under Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Standards on page 20, new accounting rules are effective for all restructuring activities after December 31, 2002.

     For a detailed discussion on the application of these and other accounting policies, see Note 1 in our audited consolidated financial statements referred to in Item 8 of this Report.

Overview of Statement of Operations

     We recognize revenue when title is transferred to our customers, which predominantly occurs upon shipment from our facilities. Our gross sales are reduced by an allowance for returns to arrive at the net sales reported in our financial statements.

     Cost of goods sold includes materials, labor, and overhead expenses incurred in the manufacture of our products. Cost of goods sold also includes charges for obsolete and slow moving inventories and charges for impairment of long-lived assets used in our manufacturing operations. Many factors affect our gross margin, including capacity utilization, product mix, and production volume.

     Selling, general, and administrative expenses primarily include the salaries for executive, finance, accounting, and human resources personnel; salaries and commissions paid to our internal sales force and external

11

Table of Contents

sales representatives and marketing costs; insurance expenses; depreciation expense related to assets not used in manufacturing activities; and professional fees for auditing and legal assistance and general corporate expenses.

     Severance, retention, closure and relocation costs primarily related to costs associated with the closure of administrative offices in 2000 and severance costs due to reductions in our administrative workforce. Severance, retention, relocation and closure costs that relate to manufacturing activities are included in cost of goods sold.

     Recapitalization transaction costs consist of financial advisory fees and legal, accounting and consulting fees related to the recapitalization transaction for EFTC that was completed in 2000. Merger transaction costs relate primarily to costs incurred in connection with the business combination between EFTC and K*TEC, which is described in Note 2 of our consolidated financial statements included in this Report. The costs included fees primarily related to professional fees and printing costs for the combination and related Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The business combination was accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control, and, accordingly, these costs were charged to operations in the period when the costs were incurred.

     Related party fees include management fees and advisory fees paid to affiliates of our majority stockholder.

     Impairment of long-lived assets reflects charges related to administrative assets; impairment of manufacturing assets is included in cost of goods sold.

     Goodwill amortization expenses include the amortization of goodwill relating to the 1997 acquisition of Current Electronics, Inc. and the 2000 acquisition of K*TEC Electronics Holding Corporation. Effective January 1, 2002, goodwill was no longer permitted to be amortized when Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 became effective.

     Interest expense relates to our senior credit facilities and other long-term debt obligations. Interest expense also includes the amortization of debt issuance costs.

Results of Operations

     Our results of operations are affected by several factors, primarily the level and timing of customer orders (especially orders from our top three customers, Honeywell, Applied Materials, and Emulex). The level and timing of orders placed by a customer vary due to the customer’s attempts to balance its inventory, changes in the customer’s manufacturing strategy, and variation in demand for its products due to, among other things, product life cycles, competitive conditions, and general economic conditions. In the past, changes in orders from customers have had a significant effect on our quarterly results of operations. The following table sets forth certain operating data as a percentage of net sales for the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001, and 2002.

12

Table of Contents

Year Ended December 31, 2001 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2002

     Net Sales. Net sales decreased $203.6 million, or 35.4%, from $574.4 million in 2001 to $370.8 million in 2002. This decrease in 2002 net sales was primarily attributable to significant decreases in net sales across our customer base, including decreases with Honeywell and Emulex of $133.5 million and $32.9 million, respectively. The decrease in net sales in 2002 was primarily attributable to significant downturns in the industries that our major customers are engaged in, including aerospace and networking equipment. During 2002, our net sales included $24.2 million of excess inventories that were sold back to our customers pursuant to contractual provisions of our customer agreements. The decrease in net sales in 2002 was partially offset by $20.9 million of net sales related to the March 2002 acquisition of the assets of Midwestern Electronics, Inc.

     For 2001, Honeywell, Applied Materials, and Emulex accounted for 50%, 15%, and 11%, respectively, of our net sales. For 2002, Honeywell, Applied Materials and Emulex accounted for 42%, 22%, and 9%, respectively, of our net sales.

     For the first quarter of 2003, we do not expect a significant change from the approximately $78 million of net sales that we reported in the fourth quarter of 2002.

     Gross Profit (Loss). Our gross profit decreased $23.3 million from a loss of $4.7 million in 2001 to a loss of $28.0 million in 2002. Similarly, gross profit as a percentage of net sales deteriorated from a loss of 0.8% of net sales in 2001 to a loss of 7.5% of net sales in 2002, primarily due to $13.6 million of restructuring charges, unfavorable changes in product mix, our inability to reduce fixed costs in proportion to the decline in net sales, and nominal gross margins associated with $24.2 million of revenue from the sale of excess inventories in 2002. These adverse changes were partially offset by a $9.1 million reduction in write-downs resulting from excess and obsolete inventories during 2002 compared to 2001.

     During 2002, we decided to close manufacturing facilities in Ottawa, Kansas and Fremont, California, and we took other actions to reduce the size of our workforce. These activities resulted in total charges to cost of goods sold of $13.6 million. The $13.6 million charge consists of $10.1 million for lease exit costs; $2.8 million for impairment of a building and manufacturing equipment; and $0.7 million for severance, retention, and moving costs. The benefits of these restructuring activities are not expected to be fully realized until the first quarter of 2003.

     During 2001, we assessed certain long-lived assets for impairment related to the planned move to a new facility in the Northeast, and the abandonment of manufacturing-related software that is no longer expected to be used. Due to changes in our customers and product mix, we also assessed the carrying value of intellectual property and manufacturing equipment related to those customers during 2001. Accordingly, we recognized an impairment expense of $1.3 million that was included in cost of goods sold in 2001. During 2001, we also recognized charges of $1.4 million for severance costs related to workforce reductions and $0.1 million for lease exit cost related to facility closures.

     Inventory write-downs decreased $9.1 million from $14.5 million, or 2.5% of net sales in 2001 to $5.4 million, or 1.5% of net sales, in 2002. This reduction in inventory write-downs resulted primarily from our substantial efforts over the past year to improve our inventory management processes and to work more closely with our customers to minimize losses due to excess inventories.

     Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses (“SG & A”) decreased $2.4 million, or 8.1%, from $29.6 million in 2001 to $27.2 million in 2002. The decrease in SG & A in 2002 was primarily attributable to a reduction in selling related expenses, partially offset by an increase in professional fees.

     Severance, Retention, Closure and Relocation Costs. The income statement caption for severance, retention, closure and relocation costs (“SCRC”) only includes costs that were unrelated to manufacturing activities. In 2001 and 2002, we incurred SCRC costs of $0.2 million, primarily for severance costs related to the termination of administrative employees.

     Recapitalization and Merger Transaction Costs. In 2001, we incurred costs, primarily for a fairness opinion and professional fees, of $2.4 million related to the business combination between EFTC and K*TEC.

13

Table of Contents

During 2002, we incurred additional costs of $0.3 million, primarily for professional fees and printing costs. This business combination, which was completed on February 28, 2002, was accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control and, accordingly, these costs were charged to operations in the period in which the costs were incurred.

     Related Party Fees. Related party fees decreased $3.0 million, or 77.7%, from $3.8 million in 2001 to $0.8 million in 2002. In 2001, affiliates of our majority stockholder charged fees of $1.8 million for investment advisory services related to the credit facility entered into in January 2001 with Citibank and $0.7 million in connection with the merger of EFTC and K*TEC. During 2001, affiliates of our majority stockholder charged management fees of $1.3 million. Effective March 1, 2002, a new management fee arrangement was effective which provides for annual fees of $0.8 million.

     Goodwill amortization. During 2001, goodwill amortization included $0.3 million related to the 1997 acquisition of Current Electronics, Inc. and $2.6 million related to the 2000 acquisition of K*TEC from Kent Electronics. Effective January 1, 2002, goodwill was no longer permitted to be amortized when Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 became effective.

     Interest Expense. Interest expense decreased $9.6 million, or 79.0%, from $12.2 million in 2001 to $2.6 million in 2002, primarily due to a decrease in average outstanding borrowings. Our weighted average borrowings decreased from $85.9 million in 2001 to $16.7 million in 2002. Our weighted average interest rate (computed without regard to amortization of debt issuance costs) also decreased from 9.9% in 2001 to 9.4% in 2002. The most significant event leading to lower borrowings and interest rates in 2002 was the May 2001 conversion to common stock of over $59 million of Convertible Notes held by Thayer-Blum Funding. These notes accrued interest at 8.875% and were converted to 5,940,837 shares of Suntron common stock in May 2001 as a condition of the K*TEC merger agreement.

     Lower interest rates on our revolving credit facilities in 2002 also contributed to the reduction in interest expense. The prime rate decreased by approximately 4.75 percentage points during 2001 and the prime rate decreased by one-half percentage point in 2002. These reductions in the prime rate also had a favorable impact because the interest rate on the revolving line of credit is a variable rate based on the prime and LIBOR rates. However, the positive impact of lower prime and LIBOR rates in 2002 was partially offset by an increase in the margin in excess of these rates due to the November 2001 amendment to our credit agreement with Citibank. Additionally, as we reduce the principal balance on the revolver, we are still subject to a 0.5% commitment fee on the unused portion of the facility and these fees accounted for about two percentage points of our 9.4% effective interest rate in 2002.

     A portion of the purchase price for the October 2000 acquisition of K*TEC was subject to a dispute that was expected to be resolved through arbitration proceedings. On May 7, 2002, the parties agreed to settle the dispute, and the $12.2 million principal balance of a note payable to the former owner was reduced by $6.9 million, resulting in an adjusted principal balance of $5.3 million. This note, which provided for interest at 14%, was repaid in May 2002. This settlement also resulted in a $1.0 million benefit in 2002 due to elimination of previously accrued interest on the portion of the principal balance that was eliminated in the settlement.

     Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets. In April 2001, we entered into a settlement agreement with respect to the earn-out calculation related to the 1999 sale of our Services Division. As a result of this agreement, we received a final payment of $0.6 million that accounted for $0.6 million of the gain on sale of assets in 2001. In 2001, we also recognized a gain of $0.2 million from the sale of equipment. In 2002, we recognized a loss from the sale of equipment for $0.2 million.

     Income Taxes. K*TEC and EFTC reported their results separately for income tax purposes in 2000 and 2001. In 2000, K*TEC generated earnings that resulted in an income tax provision of $0.3 million. In 2001, K*TEC incurred a significant net loss which resulted in a tax benefit of $0.3 million. However, in 2001 EFTC generated earnings that resulted in alternative minimum tax liability of $0.3 million, resulting in nominal tax expense for 2001 on a combined basis. In 2002, the tax laws changed and the alternative minimum tax liability that we accrued in 2001 was eliminated, resulting in a tax benefit of $0.3 million for 2002.

14

Table of Contents

     Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting for Goodwill. During the first quarter of 2002, we adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, which resulted in the requirement to perform a periodic impairment test, using a two-step process. The first step is to identify if potential impairment of goodwill exists. If impairment of goodwill is determined to exist, the second step of the goodwill impairment test measures the amount of the impairment loss, using a fair value-based approach.

          We engaged an independent firm specializing in valuation services to assist in the determination if impairment of goodwill should be recognized under Statement 142. We concluded that goodwill related to the K*TEC reporting unit was impaired for the entire carrying value, which resulted in an impairment loss of $69.0 million. This impairment loss was recorded as the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle.

Year Ended December 31, 2000 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2001

     Net Sales. Net sales increased $111.3 million, or 24.0%, from $463.1 million in 2000 to $574.4 million in 2001. This increase in net sales in 2001 was primarily attributable to a full year of operations related to the October 2000 acquisition of K*TEC. Net sales related to the customers of K*TEC accounted for $135.7 million of net sales in 2000 and $226.4 million in 2001, an increase of $90.7 million. The increase in net sales in 2001 was also attributable to an increase of approximately $51.7 million in sales to Honeywell. Despite the overall increase in net sales in 2001, we experienced sequential quarterly declines in net sales throughout 2001, which was primarily attributable to significant downturns in the industries that our major customers are engaged in, including aerospace, semiconductor capital equipment and networking equipment.

     For 2000, Honeywell, Applied Materials, and Emulex accounted for 51%, 15%, and 6%, respectively, of our net sales. For 2001, Honeywell, Applied Materials and Emulex accounted for 50%, 15%, and 11%, respectively, of our net sales.

     Gross Profit (Loss). Our gross profit decreased $28.6 million from a profit of $23.9 million in 2000 to a loss of $4.7 million in 2001. Similarly, gross profit as a percentage of net sales deteriorated from a profit of 5.2% of net sales in 2000 to a loss of 0.8% of net sales in 2001. During 2001, we began experiencing sharp sequential reductions in quarterly net sales which resulted in several facilities that were substantially under utilized. While we took actions as described below, it was not possible to reduce fixed costs in proportion to the drop in net sales. The decrease in gross profit in 2001 was also attributable to an increase in losses due to excess and obsolete inventories of $7.4 million, and an increase of $1.3 million in restructuring charges.

     In response to poor factory utilization in 2001, we decided to close a manufacturing facility in Plano, Texas, and we took other actions to reduce the size of our workforce. These activities resulted in total charges to cost of goods sold of $2.8 million, including $1.4 million for severance and retention payments related to workforce reductions and the relocation of certain employees.

     In connection with the relocation of our Northeast facility in 2001, we assessed certain long-lived assets for impairment and we also decided to abandon certain manufacturing-related software that is no longer expected to be used. Due to changes in our customers and product mix, in 2001 we also assessed the carrying value of intellectual property and manufacturing equipment related to those customers. Accordingly, we recognized an aggregate impairment charge of $1.3 million that was included in cost of goods sold in 2001.

     Inventory write-downs increased $7.4 million, from $7.1 million or 1.5% of net sales in 2000, to $14.5 million or 2.5% of net sales in 2001. This increase in inventory write-downs in 2001 resulted primarily from the reduction in demand that resulted from the precipitous decline in net sales that we experienced during 2001.

     Selling, General, and Administrative Expenses. Selling, general, and administrative expenses (“SG & A”) increased $2.6 million, or 9.6%, from $27.0 million in 2000 to $29.6 million in 2001. In 2000, SG & A expenses included $3.1 million for consulting services intended to accelerate operational improvement at several of our facilities. SG & A in 2000 also included a charge of $1.9 million for accelerated depreciation and amortization of assets that were not expected to be utilized after the 2000 relocation of corporate headquarters to Phoenix. Finally, the results in 2000 included approximately $0.6 million for SG & A at divisions that were sold or closed by September 2000.

15

Table of Contents

     In addition to the charges discussed above, the increase in SG & A during 2001 was attributable to the October 2000 acquisition of K*TEC, which accounted for SG & A costs of $3.3 million in 2000 and $12.3 million in 2001. The 2001 increase in SG & A related to K*TEC was partially offset by reductions in administrative expenditures as we reduced the administrative workforce and other costs in response the lower levels of business activity as our sales declined throughout the year.

     Severance, Retention, Closure and Relocation Costs. The income statement caption for severance, retention, closure and relocation costs (“SCRC”) only includes such costs that were unrelated to manufacturing activities. We recognized SCRC charges totaling $4.6 million in 2000 for severance, recruiting, and other costs associated with changes in management and the relocation of corporate headquarters. In 2001, we incurred SCRC costs of $0.2 million, primarily for severance costs related to the termination of administrative employees.

     Recapitalization and Merger Transaction Costs. In March 2000, we completed the first stage of a recapitalization that resulted in a cash infusion of $68.0 million. In connection with this transaction, we incurred charges totaling $5.3 million, including $1.6 million for financial advisor fees paid to unrelated parties, a fee of $0.8 million paid to Thayer-Blum Funding, costs of $0.8 million related to a shareholder meeting to approve the recapitalization, and costs for legal, accounting, and management consultant services of $2.1 million. We capitalized costs associated with the issuance of senior subordinated exchangeable notes and a revolving credit agreement, and all other costs were charged to operations in 2000.

     In 2001, we incurred costs, primarily for a fairness opinion and professional fees, of $2.4 million related to the business combination between EFTC and K*TEC. This business combination, which was initiated in May 2001 and completed in February 2002, was accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control. Accordingly, these costs were charged to operations in the period in which the costs were incurred.

     Related Party Fees. Related party fees increased $1.0 million, or 38.2%, from $2.7 million in 2000 to $3.7 million in 2001. In 2000, affiliates of our majority stockholder charged fees of $2.3 million for investment advisory services related to the October 2000 purchase of K*TEC from Kent Electronics. In 2001, affiliates of our majority stockholder charged fees of $1.8 million for investment advisory services related to the credit facility entered into in January 2001 with Citibank and $0.7 million in connection with the merger of EFTC and K*TEC. During 2000, affiliates of our majority stockholder charged management fees of $0.4 million and in 2001 management fees amounted to $1.3 million.

     Impairment of Long-lived Assets. In 2000, we recognized an impairment charge of $1.7 million, including $1.3 million for software that we decided to abandon. During 2001, we recognized impairment of manufacturing assets, but the amounts were charged to cost of goods sold as discussed above under the caption “Gross Profit.”

     Goodwill amortization. During 2000, goodwill amortization included $0.3 million related to the 1997 acquisition of Current Electronics, Inc. and $0.6 million related to the 2000 acquisition of K*TEC from Kent Electronics. During 2001, goodwill amortization included $0.3 million related to the 1997 acquisition of Current Electronics, Inc. and $2.6 million related to the 2000 acquisition of K*TEC.

     Interest Expense. Interest expense increased $1.3 million, or 12.3%, from $10.9 million in 2000 to $12.2 million in 2001. The increase in interest expense in 2001 was primarily due to the November 2001 amendment to our Citibank credit facility, which resulted in $2.6 million of accelerated amortization. This charge was partially offset by lower rates on our revolving credit facilities due to reductions in prime and LIBOR interest rates. The prime rate increased by one percentage point in 2000, followed by a decrease of nearly five percentage points during 2001. The 2001 reductions in the prime rate favorably impacted our interest expense, since the interest rates under our revolving lines of credit fluctuate based on the prime and LIBOR rates.

     Gain (Loss) on Sale of Assets. During 1999, we recognized a loss of $20.6 million in connection with the sale of substantially all of the assets of our Services Division. The 1999 loss gave effect to the deferral of $2.5 million of the proceeds for a post-closing earn-out contingency. During 2000, the purchaser agreed to pay $1.9 million under the earn-out contingency provision of the sales agreement. Accordingly, we recognized a gain of $4.4 million in 2000, consisting of $2.5 million of the 1999 proceeds that we were entitled to retain and the additional consideration of $1.9 million that the purchaser agreed to pay in 2000. However, in the fourth quarter of 2000 we notified the purchaser that we believed we were entitled to a higher payment than their calculation of $1.9 million.

16

Table of Contents

     In April 2001, we entered into a settlement agreement with respect to the earn-out calculation. As a result of this agreement, we received a final payment of $0.6 million that accounted for $0.6 million of the gain on sale of assets in 2001. In 2001, we also recognized a gain of $0.2 million from the sale of equipment.

     Income Taxes. K*TEC and EFTC reported their results separately for income tax purposes in 2000 and 2001. In 2000, K*TEC generated earnings that resulted in an income tax provision of $0.3 million.

     In 2001, K*TEC incurred a significant net loss which resulted in a tax benefit of $0.3 million. However, in 2001 EFTC generated earnings that resulted in a tax liability of $0.3 million, resulting in nominal tax expense on a combined basis.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

     Cash Flows from Operating Activities. Net cash provided by operating activities was $75.5 million in 2001 compared to $22.8 million in 2002. The difference between our net loss in 2002 of $126.2 million and $22.8 million of cash provided by operating activities was primarily attributable to the $69.0 million cumulative effect adjustment related to the change in accounting for goodwill, a reduction in inventories of $42.9 million, $22.0 million of depreciation and amortization expense, an increase in liabilities for severance, retention, closure and relocation costs of $8.5 million, a decrease of $5.0 million in trade receivables, and $2.8 million of impairment expense, partially offset by a decrease of $1.8 million in accrued compensation and benefits.

     Days sales outstanding (based on net sales for the year and net trade receivables outstanding at the end of the year) amounted to 20 days in 2001 and 29 days in 2002.

     Inventories decreased 36.9% to $67.4 million at December 31, 2002, compared to $106.8 million at December 31, 2001. Inventory turns (i.e., cost of goods sold for the year, excluding restructuring charges, divided by period end inventory) amounted to 5.4 times in 2001, compared to 5.7 times in 2002. The improvement in inventory turns in 2002 is due in part to our success in selling excess inventories to our customers pursuant to contractual agreements with those customers, and by effectively reducing the levels of inventories in response to lower customer sales forecasts.

     Cash Flows from Investing Activities. Net cash used by investing activities in 2001 was $16.8 million, compared with net cash used by investing activities of $7.8 million in 2002. Investing cash flows in 2002 reflect the payment of approximately $5.5 million in March 2002 for the acquisition of the assets of Midwestern Electronics, Inc., and $2.3 million for other capital expenditures.

     Cash Flows from Financing Activities. Net cash used by financing activities in 2001 was $78.8 million, compared with net cash used by financing activities of $27.6 million in 2002. During 2002, financing cash flows reflect the net repayment of debt under revolving credit facilities of $21.0 million, the repayment of $5.3 million of debt to the former parent of K*TEC, the payment of $0.3 million of debt issuance costs related to the credit facility with Citibank, and a decrease in outstanding checks in excess of cash balances of $0.9 million.

17

Table of Contents

Contractual Obligations. The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2002 (Dollars in Thousands):

     The amounts shown above for non-cancelable operating leases include $11.6 million, which has been included in the determination of our liability for lease exit costs which is recorded on our balance sheet at December 31, 2002. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States require that we record a liability for future lease payments, net of estimated sublease rentals, for facilities that we have decided to close. Non-cancelable operating lease obligations (net of the accrued liability for lease exit costs) represent the only off-balance-sheet financing activities into which we have entered.

     We believe we will be able to fund the non-cancelable operating lease obligations from operating cash flows during the periods that payments are required. If we have not repaid outstanding borrowings from cash flow that may be generated over the next three years, upon maturity of the Citibank credit facility in 2005, we currently intend to enter into negotiations for a new credit agreement that provides for an extension of the maturity date. However, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in this regard.

     Capital Resources. Our working capital at December 31, 2002 totaled $50.4 million compared to $105.5 million at December 31, 2001. The $55.1 million decrease in working capital was primarily attributable to a $39.4 million reduction in inventories and a $12.6 million reduction in cash and equivalents.

     At December 31, 2002, the borrowing base under our $75.0 million revolving credit facility with Citibank would have supported borrowings up to $54.3 million, and we had outstanding borrowings of approximately $10.9 million and an outstanding letter of credit of $0.3 million under this credit facility. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2002, we had unused availability of $43.1 million. At December 31, 2002, we also had cash and equivalents of $1.6 million, resulting in aggregate existing capital resources of $44.7 million.

     On February 28, 2002, the combination of EFTC and K*TEC was completed, and EFTC and K*TEC became wholly owned subsidiaries of Suntron. The credit facility with Bank of America, N.A. was repaid in March 2002, and we are now a party to the credit facility with Citibank, N.A. that K*TEC entered into in January 2001. As a result of the substantial net loss in 2002, we would have violated year-end restrictive covenants for EBITDA and tangible net worth as contained in the credit agreement with Citibank. On March 31, 2003, Citibank agreed to a permanent waiver of the year-end covenant violations, as well as expected violations of the same covenants for the first quarter of 2003. In addition, on April 11, 2003, Citibank agreed to amend the credit facility to provide less stringent covenants for EBITDA and tangible net worth, and we believe we will be able to comply with the revised covenants. The amended facility continues to provide a revolving line of credit of up to $75.0 million, and the maturity date was extended until April 2005. Borrowings under the amended credit facility will bear interest at the prime rate plus 2.50% for “Base Rate” borrowings and the LIBOR rate plus 3.75% for “LIBOR Rate” borrowings. The credit agreement also limits or prohibits us from paying dividends, incurring additional debt, selling significant assets, or merging with other entities without the consent of the lenders. Substantially all of our assets are pledged as collateral for outstanding borrowings.

     Total borrowings are subject to limitation based on a percentage of eligible accounts receivable, inventories, real estate, and equipment. During the first quarter of 2003, updated inventory and equipment appraisals related to the borrowing base determinations were completed. After giving effect to the revised appraisals and other

18

Table of Contents

changes resulting from the April 2003 amendment, the borrowing base calculation would have permitted borrowings up to $46.9 million as of April 11, 2003. After deducting outstanding borrowings of $17.4 million, we had additional borrowing availability of approximately $29.5 million under the amended credit facility as of April 11, 2003.

     We believe that adequate capital resources are in place to fund our working capital and other cash requirements for the next 12 months. However, depending on the amount of capital resources that are devoted to any future acquisitions of businesses, and increased working capital requirements if sales levels increase significantly, we may need to seek additional funds through public or private debt or equity offerings, bank borrowings, or leasing arrangements.

     The continued availability of our credit facility with Citibank is a critical assumption underlying our belief that adequate capital resources are currently in place to fund our planned activities for the next 12 months. The borrowing base calculation under this credit facility is based on a percentage of eligible receivables and inventories, plus the appraised value of certain real estate and equipment. Accordingly, our borrowing availability decreases as our net receivables and inventories decline. However, the borrowing base generally increases as our receivables and inventories increase. If our sales begin to increase rapidly, this credit facility is critical to enable us to finance the increased working capital requirements associated with growth.

     In order to ensure the continuing availability of funding under our credit facility, we are required to comply with certain financial and reporting covenants as discussed above. While the EBITDA financial covenant included in the April 2003 amended credit agreement is less stringent than the previous agreement, we will generally be required to demonstrate sequential quarterly improvements in our financial performance beginning in the third quarter of 2003. If we violate the financial covenants in the future, there can be no assurance that Citibank would waive our noncompliance. In these circumstances, Citibank could elect to withdraw the credit facility, which would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition, resulting in the need to seek other sources of financing. There can be no assurance that we would be successful in securing additional financing, and even if we would be successful, the terms may be less favorable than we currently have with Citibank.

Impact of Recently Issued Accounting Standards

     In August 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations. This standard requires entities to record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred. When the liability is initially recorded, the entity capitalizes a cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, an entity either settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss upon settlement. This standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2002, with earlier application encouraged. Management does not believe the initial application of Statement 143 will have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

     In July 2002, the FASB issued Statement No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities. This standard requires companies to recognize costs associated with exit or disposal activities when they are incurred rather than at the date of a commitment to an exit or disposal plan. Examples of costs covered by this standard include lease termination costs and certain employee severance costs that are associated with a restructuring, discontinued operation, plant closing, or other exit or disposal activity. Previous accounting guidance was provided by EITF Issue No. 94-3, Liability Recognition for Certain Employee Termination Benefits and Other Costs to Exit an Activity (including Certain Costs Incurred in a Restructuring). Statement 146 replaces Issue 94-3. Statement 146 is to be applied prospectively to exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002. Accordingly, plant closures in Ottawa, Kansas and Fremont, California that were announced in the third quarter of 2002 were not accounted for under Statement 146.

     In December 2002, the FASB issued Statement No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure. Statement 148 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2002 and amends Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, to provide alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. In addition, Statement 148 amends the disclosure requirements of Statement 123 to require prominent disclosures in

19

Table of Contents

both annual and interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. The Company adopted Statement 148 as of December 31, 2002. The effect of the adoption of this statement was not material as the Company continues to use the intrinsic value method allowed under Statement 123.

Factors That May Affect Future Results

     An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the factors described below, in addition to those discussed elsewhere in this report, in analyzing an investment in our common stock. If any of the events described below occurs, our business, financial condition, and results of operations would likely suffer, the trading price of our common stock could fall, and you could lose all or part of the money you paid for our common stock. In addition, the following factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from those projected in our forward-looking statements, whether made in this Form 10-K, our annual or quarterly reports to stockholders, future press releases, other SEC filings, or orally, whether in presentations, responses to questions, or otherwise. See “Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

We have experienced declining net sales.

     Our net sales declined throughout 2001 from $197.9 million in the first quarter to $86.0 million in the fourth quarter. During 2002, our net sales have increased to $92.6 million in the first quarter, $100.4 million in the second quarter and $99.5 million in the third quarter. For the fourth quarter of 2002, we experienced a sharp decline in net sales to $78.3 million, as a result of the continuing soft demand in the end markets served by our customers, specifically aerospace and semiconductor capital equipment. For the first quarter of 2003, we do not expect a significant change from the approximately $78 million of net sales that we reported in the fourth quarter of 2002.

We are dependent upon the highly competitive electronics industry, and excess capacity or decreased demand for products produced by this industry could result in increased price competition as well as a decrease in our gross margins and unit volume sales.

     Our business is heavily dependent on the electronics manufacturing services industry, which is extremely competitive and includes hundreds of companies. The contract manufacturing services we provide are available from many independent sources, and we compete with numerous domestic and foreign electronic manufacturing services firms, including Benchmark Electronics, Inc.; Celestica Inc; Flextronics International Ltd.; Jabil Circuit, Inc.; Manufacturers Services, Ltd.; Pemstar, Inc.; Plexus Corp.; Sanmina-SCI Corporation; SMTC Corporation; Solectron Corporation; Sypris Electronics, LLC; and others. Many of such competitors are more established in the industry and have greater financial, manufacturing or marketing resources than we do. We may be operating at a cost disadvantage as compared to our competitors that have greater direct buying power from component suppliers, distributors, and raw material suppliers and have lower cost structures. In addition, many of our competitors have a broader geographic presence, including manufacturing facilities in Asia, Europe, and South America.

     We believe that the principal competitive factors in our targeted market are quality, reliability, ability to meet delivery schedules, technological sophistication, geographic location, and price. We also face competition from our current and potential customers, who are continually evaluating the relative merits of internal manufacturing versus contract manufacturing for various products. As stated above, the price of our services is often one of many factors that may be considered by prospective customers in awarding new business. We believe existing and prospective customers are placing greater emphasis on contract manufacturers that can offer manufacturing services in low cost regions of the world, such as certain countries in Asia. Accordingly, in situations where the price of our services is a primary driver in prospective customers’ decision to award new business, we currently believe we may have a competitive disadvantage in these circumstances.

     A significant percentage of our net sales are generated from the aerospace, semiconductor capital equipment, industrial controls and instrumentation, medical equipment, networking and telecommunications equipment segments of the electronics industry, which is characterized by intense competition and significant fluctuations in product demand. Furthermore, these segments are subject to economic cycles and have experienced in the past, and are likely to experience in the future, recessionary economic cycles. A recession or any other event leading to excess capacity or a downturn in these segments of the electronics industry results in intensified price competition as well as a decrease in our unit volume sales and our gross margins.

20

Table of Contents

We are dependent on the aerospace industry.

     Our principal customer is engaged in the aerospace market. See “—We are dependent upon a small number of customers for a large portion of our net sales, and a decline in sales to major customers would harm our results of operations.” Consequently, a significant percentage of our net sales have been derived from the aerospace segment of the electronics industry. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks using hijacked commercial aircraft and the ensuing war on terrorism have resulted in a reduction in demand for our services, which has had an adverse impact on our results of operations over the past year. See “—We have experienced declining net sales.” In addition, continuing tensions in the Middle East, including the war in Iraq, have resulted in higher oil prices, which could result in further reductions in demand for products of our aerospace customers, which would have a continuing negative impact on our results of operations.

We are dependent upon a small number of customers for a large portion of our net sales, and a decline in sales to major customers would harm our results of operations.

     A small number of customers is responsible for a significant portion of our net sales. Sales to Honeywell, Applied Materials and Emulex represented approximately 42%, 22%, and 9%, respectively, of our net sales in 2002. We expect a significant portion of our net sales will continue to be generated by a small number of customers.

     Our customer concentration could increase or decrease depending on future customer requirements, which will depend in large part on market conditions in the electronics industry segments in which our customers participate. The loss of one or more major customers or a decline in sales to our major customers could significantly harm our business and results of operations.

     If we are not able to expand our customer base, we will continue to depend upon a small number of customers for a significant percentage of our net sales. There can be no assurance that current customers, including Honeywell, Applied Materials, Emulex, or future customers will not terminate their manufacturing arrangements with us or significantly change, reduce, or delay the amount of manufacturing services ordered from us.

     In addition, we generate significant accounts receivable in connection with providing services to our customers. If one or more of our significant customers were to become insolvent or were otherwise unable or unwilling to pay for our services, our results of operations would deteriorate substantially.

Our customers may cancel their orders, change production quantities, or delay production.

     Electronics manufacturing service providers must provide increasingly rapid product turnaround for their customers. We generally do not obtain firm, long-term purchase commitments from our customers, and we expect to continue to experience reduced lead-times in customer orders. Customers may cancel their orders, change production quantities, or delay production for a number of reasons. Cancellations, reductions, or delays by a significant customer or by a group of customers would seriously harm our results of operations. When customer orders are changed or cancelled, we may be forced to hold excess inventories and incur carrying costs as a result of delays, cancellations, or reductions in orders or poor forecasting by our key customers.

     In addition, we make significant decisions, including determining the levels of business that we seek and accept, production schedules, component procurement commitments, personnel needs, and other resource requirements based on estimates of customer production requirements. The short-term nature of our customers’ commitments to us, combined with the possibility of rapid changes in demand for their products, reduces our ability to estimate accurately future customer orders. In addition, because many of our costs and operating expenses are relatively fixed, a reduction in customer demand could harm our operating results.

     Conversely, customers may on occasion require rapid increases in production. These situations often result in inefficiencies related to hiring and training workers, as well as incremental costs incurred to expedite the purchase and delivery of raw materials. Periods of rapid growth tend to stress our resources and we may not have sufficient capacity to meet our customers’ delivery requirements.

If we experience excess capacity due to variability in customer demand, our gross margins may fall.

     We may schedule certain of our production facilities at less than full capacity to retain our ability to respond to additional quick turnaround orders. However, if these orders are not received, we may forego some

21

Table of Contents

production and could experience excess capacity. When we experience excess capacity, our sales revenue may be insufficient to fully cover our fixed overhead expenses and our gross margins will fall. Conversely, we may not be able to capture all potential revenue in a given period if our customers’ demands for quick turnaround services exceed our capacity during that period.

If we are unable to respond to rapid technological change and process development, we may not be able to compete effectively.

     The market for our products and services is characterized by rapidly changing technology and continual implementation of new production processes. The future success of our business will depend in large part upon our ability to maintain and enhance our technological capabilities, to develop and market products that meet changing customer needs, and to successfully anticipate or respond to technological changes on a cost-effective and timely basis. We expect that the investment necessary to maintain our technological position will increase as customers make demands for products and services requiring more advanced technology on a quicker turnaround basis.

     In addition, the electronics manufacturing services industry could encounter competition from new or revised manufacturing and production technologies that render existing manufacturing and production technology less competitive or obsolete. We may not be able to respond effectively to the technological requirements of the changing market. If we need new technologies and equipment to remain competitive, the development, acquisition and implementation of those technologies may require us to make significant capital investments.

We periodically address excess capacity issues through plant closures, which may result in significant charges.

     When our net sales decline significantly, it is difficult to operate our plants profitably since it is not possible to eliminate most of our fixed costs. If we determine that the decline in sales is unlikely to be followed by a rapid recovery, we may determine that there are significant benefits to reducing our cost structure by closing plants and transferring existing business to other plants that are also operating below optimal capacity levels. In order to realize the long-term benefits of these actions, we usually incur substantial charges for impairment of assets, lease exit costs, and the payment of severance and retention benefits to affected employees. In addition to the up-front costs associated with these actions, the transition of inventory and manufacturing services to a different facility can result in quality and delivery issues that may have an adverse impact in retaining customers that are affected by the plant closure. Our results of operations could also be materially and adversely affected by our inability to timely sell or sublet closed facilities on expected terms, or otherwise achieve the expected benefits of our restructuring activities.

Operating in foreign countries exposes us to increased risks that could adversely affect our results of operations.

     We currently have foreign operations in Mexico. We may in the future expand into other foreign countries. We have limited experience in managing geographically dispersed operations and in operating in foreign countries. Because of the scope of our international operations, we are subject to the following risks, which could adversely impact our results of operations:

22

Table of Contents

     In addition, changes in policies by the United States or foreign governments could negatively affect our operating results due to increased duties, increased regulatory requirements, higher taxation, currency conversion limitations, restrictions on the transfer of funds, the imposition of or increase in tariffs, and limitations on imports or exports. Also, we could be negatively affected if our host countries revise their policies away from encouraging foreign investment or foreign trade, including tax holidays.

If we are unsuccessful in managing future opportunities for growth, our results of operations will be harmed.

     Our future results of operations will be affected by our ability to successfully manage future opportunities for growth. Rapid growth is likely to place a significant strain on our managerial, operational, financial, and other resources. If this growth materializes, it may require us to implement additional management information systems, to further develop our operating, administrative, financial, and accounting systems and controls and to maintain close coordination among our accounting, finance, sales and marketing, and customer service and support departments. In addition, we may be required to retain additional personnel to adequately support our growth. If we cannot effectively manage periods of rapid growth in our operations, we may not be able to continue to grow, or we may grow at a slower pace. Any failure to successfully manage growth and to develop financial controls and accounting and operating systems or to add and retain personnel that adequately support growth could harm our business and financial results.

Our results of operations are affected by a variety of factors, which could cause our results of operations to fail to meet expectations.

     Our results of operations have varied, and our results of operations may continue to fluctuate significantly from period to period, including on a quarterly basis. Our results of operations are affected by a number of factors, including:

We are dependent on limited and sole source suppliers for electronic components and may experience component shortages, which would cause us to delay shipments to customers.

     We are dependent on certain suppliers, including limited and sole source suppliers, to provide critical electronic components and other materials for our operations. At various times, there have been shortages of some of the electronic components we use, and suppliers of some components have lacked sufficient capacity to meet the demand for these components. For example, from time to time, some components we use, including semiconductors, capacitors, and resistors, have been subject to shortages, and suppliers have been forced to allocate available quantities among their customers. Such shortages have disrupted our operations in the past, which resulted in incomplete or late shipments of products to our customers. Our inability to obtain any needed components during future periods of allocations could cause delays in shipments to our customers. The inability to make scheduled shipments could in turn cause us to experience a shortfall in revenue. Component shortages may also increase our cost of goods due to premium charges we may pay to purchase components in short supply. Accordingly, even though component shortages have not had a lasting negative impact on our business, component shortages could harm our results of operations for a particular fiscal period due to the resulting revenue shortfall or cost increases and could also damage customer relationships over a longer-term period.

We depend on our key personnel and may have difficulty attracting and retaining skilled employees.

     Our future success will depend to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our key management, marketing, technical, financial, accounting and operational personnel, including James K. Bass, our President and Chief Executive Officer. The loss of the services of one or more key employees could have a material

23

Table of Contents

adverse effect on our results of operations. We also believe that our future success will depend in large part upon our ability to attract and retain additional highly skilled managerial and technical resources. Competition for such personnel is intense. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in attracting and retaining such personnel. In addition, recent and potential future facility shutdowns and workforce reductions may have a negative impact on employee recruiting and retention.

Our manufacturing processes depend on the collective industry experience of our employees. If these employees were to leave and take this knowledge with them, our manufacturing processes may suffer and we may not be able to compete effectively.

     We have no patent or trade secret protection for our manufacturing processes, but instead rely on the collective experience of our employees to ensure that we continuously evaluate and adopt new technologies in our industry. Although we are not dependent on any one employee or a small number of employees, if a significant number of employees involved in our manufacturing processes were to leave our employment and we are not able to replace these people with new employees with comparable experience, our manufacturing processes may suffer as we may be unable to keep up with innovations in the industry. As a result, we may not be able to continue to compete effectively.

Our failure to comply with the requirements of environmental laws could result in fines and revocation of permits necessary to our manufacturing processes.

     Our operations are regulated under a number of federal, state, and foreign environmental and safety laws and regulations that govern, among other things, the discharge of hazardous materials into the air and water, as well as the handling, storage, and disposal of such materials. These laws and regulations include the Clean Air Act; the Clean Water Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; as well as analogous state and foreign laws. Compliance with these environmental laws is a major consideration for us because our manufacturing processes use and generate materials classified as hazardous, such as ammoniacal etching solutions, copper, and nickel. In addition, because we use hazardous materials and generate hazardous wastes in our manufacturing processes, we may be subject to potential financial liability for costs associated with the investigation and remediation of our own sites or sites at which we have arranged for the disposal of hazardous wastes, if such sites become contaminated. Even if we fully comply with applicable environmental laws and are not directly at fault for the contamination, we may still be liable. The wastes we generate include spent ammoniacal etching solutions, solder stripping solutions, and hydrochloric acid solutions containing palladium; waste water that contains heavy metals, acids, cleaners, and conditioners; and filter cake from equipment used for on-site waste treatment. We have not incurred significant costs related to compliance with environmental laws and regulations in the prior three years, and we believe that our operations substantially comply with all applicable environmental laws. However, any material violations of environmental laws by us could subject us to revocation of our effluent discharge and other environmental permits. Any such revocations could require us to cease or limit production at one or more of our facilities. Even if we ultimately prevail, environmental lawsuits against us would be time consuming and costly to defend.

     Environmental laws could also become more stringent over time, imposing greater compliance costs and increasing risks and penalties associated with violation. We operate in environmentally sensitive locations and are subject to potentially conflicting and changing regulatory agendas of political, business, and environmental groups. Changes or restrictions on discharge limits; emissions levels; or material storage, handling, or disposal might require a high level of unplanned capital investment or relocation. It is possible that environmental compliance costs and penalties from new or existing regulations may harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We may be subject to risks associated with acquisitions, and these risks could harm our results of operations.

     In 2002, we completed two business combinations and we anticipate that we will seek to identify and acquire additional suitable businesses in the electronics manufacturing services industry. The long-term success of recent business combinations will depend on our ability to unite the business strategies, human resources and information technology systems of previously separate companies. The difficulties of combining operations include the necessity of coordinating geographically separated organizations and integrating personnel with diverse business backgrounds. Combining management resources will result in changes affecting all employees and operations. Differences in management approach and corporate culture may strain employee relations.

24

Table of Contents

     Future business combinations could cause certain customers to either seek alternative sources of product supply or service, or delay or change orders for products due to uncertainty over the integration of the two companies or the strategic position of the combined company. As a result, we may experience some customer attrition.

     Acquisitions of companies and businesses and expansion of operations involve certain risks, including the following:

     Accordingly, we may experience problems in integrating the operations associated with any future acquisition. We therefore cannot provide assurance that any future acquisition will result in a positive contribution to our results of operations. In particular, the successful combination with any businesses we acquire will require substantial effort from each company, including the integration and coordination of sales and marketing efforts. The diversion of the attention of management and any difficulties encountered in the transition process, including the interruption of, or a loss of momentum in, the activities of any business acquired, problems associated with integration of management information and reporting systems, and delays in implementation of consolidation plans, could harm our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of any future acquisition. In addition, future acquisitions may result in dilutive issuances of equity securities, the incurrence of additional debt, large one-time write-offs, and the creation of goodwill or other intangible assets that could result in increased amortization or impairment expense.

Our level of indebtedness could adversely affect our financial viability, and the restrictions imposed by the terms of our debt instruments may severely limit our ability to plan for or respond to changes in our business.

     As of December 31, 2002, we had outstanding bank debt of approximately $10.9 million. In addition, subject to the restrictions under our debt agreements, we may incur significant additional indebtedness from time to time to finance business acquisitions, capital expenditures, or for other purposes.

     Significant levels of debt could have negative consequences. For example, it could:

We may need additional capital in the future and it may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all.

     While we believe our capital resources are currently adequate, we may need to raise additional funds for the following purposes:

25

Table of Contents

          investment, acquisition, and international expansion activities.

If such funds are not available when required or on acceptable terms, our business and financial results could suffer.

Our stock price may be volatile, and our stock is thinly traded, which could cause investors to lose all or part of their investments in our common stock.

     The stock market has recently experienced volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of any particular company or companies. If market or industry-based fluctuations continue, our stock price could decline regardless of our actual operating performance, and investors could lose a substantial part of their investments. Moreover, if an active public market for our stock is not sustained in the future, it may be difficult to resell our stock.

     From March 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002, the average number of shares of our common stock that traded on the NASDAQ exchange amounted to approximately 7,000 shares per day compared to 27,409,000 issued and outstanding shares. When trading volumes are this low, a relatively small buy or sell order can result in a large percentage change in the trading price of our common stock, which may be unrelated to changes in our stock price that are associated with our operating performance.

     The market price of our common stock will likely fluctuate in response to a number of factors, including the following:

Our major stockholder controls us and our stock price could be influenced by actions taken by this stockholder. Additionally, this stockholder could prevent a change of control or other business combination, or could effect a “short form” merger without the approval of other stockholders.

     Thayer-Blum owns approximately 90% of our common stock, and four of our nine directors are representatives of Thayer-Blum. The interests of Thayer-Blum may not always coincide with those of our other stockholders, particularly if Thayer-Blum decides to sell its controlling interest. In addition, Thayer-Blum will have sufficient voting power (without the approval of Suntron’s other stockholders) to elect the entire Board of Directors of Suntron and, in general, to determine the outcome of various matters submitted to stockholders for approval, including fundamental corporate transactions. Thayer-Blum could cause us to take actions that we would not consider absent Thayer-Blum’s influence, or could delay, deter, or prevent a change of control or other business combination that might otherwise be beneficial to our public stockholders.

     In addition, Thayer-Blum could contribute its Suntron stock to a subsidiary corporation that, as a 90% stockholder, then would have the ability under Delaware law to merge with or into Suntron without the approval of the other Suntron stockholders. In the event of such a “short-form” merger, Suntron stockholders would have the right to assert appraisal/dissenters’ rights to receive cash in the amount of the fair market value of their shares in lieu of the consideration they would have otherwise received from the transaction.

26

Table of Contents

ITEM 7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

     On January 26, 2001, the Company entered into a revolving line of credit agreement with Citibank, N.A. The amended credit agreement provides for total borrowings up to $75 million. The interest rate under this agreement is based either on the prime rate or LIBOR rate, plus applicable margins. Therefore, as interest rates fluctuate, the Company may experience changes in interest expense that will impact financial results. The Company has not entered into any interest rate swap agreements, or similar instruments, to protect against the risk of interest rate fluctuations. Assuming outstanding borrowings of $75 million, if interest rates were to increase or decrease by one percentage point, the result would be an increase or decrease in annual interest expense of $750,000. Accordingly, significant increases in interest rates could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future results of operations.

ITEM 8.      FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

     Reference is made to the financial statements, the report thereon, the notes thereto, and the supplementary data commencing at page F-1 of this Report, which financial statements, report, notes, and data are incorporated herein by reference.

     None.

27

Table of Contents

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

     The following table, together with the accompanying text, presents certain information, as of March 31, 2003, with respect to each of our executive officers and directors.

     James K. Bass has served as our Chief Executive Officer and President and as a director since May 2001 and as EFTC’s Chief Executive Officer since July 2000. From 1996 to June 2000, Mr. Bass was a senior vice president of Sony Corporation, a company engaged in the development, design, manufacture and sale of various kinds of electronic equipment, instruments and devices for consumer and professional markets. Prior to that, Mr. Bass spent 15 years in various manufacturing management positions at the aerospace group of General Electric Company, a company engaged in the development, manufacturing and marketing of a wide variety of products for the generation, transmission, distribution, control, and utilization of electricity. Mr. Bass also serves as a director of TTM Technologies, Inc., a provider of time-critical, one-stop manufacturing services for highly complex printed circuit boards which is also an affiliate of Thayer Capital Partners.

     John W. Briant has served as our Vice President of Materials, Quality and Process Management since February 2002. Mr. Briant served as EFTC’s Vice President of Material and Logistics from October 1999 to February 2002. Mr. Briant served as the Director of Process and Quality Management of EFTC from July 1998 to September 1999. Prior to joining EFTC, Mr. Briant held various management, procurement, and engineering positions at AlliedSignal from 1993 to 1998 and was responsible for the development of their corporate supply base for Electronic Manufacturing Services and Printed Wiring Boards. Prior to that, he held engineering positions with Honeywell’s Business and Commuter Aviation Division, a manufacturer of aerospace products and services.

     James A. Doran has served as our Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer since February 2002. Mr. Doran served as EFTC’s Controller from September 1999 to February 2002, and Mr. Doran was a member of the Board of Directors of EFTC from 1993 until 2000. Prior to joining EFTC, from 1994 to September

28

Table of Contents

1999, Mr. Doran served as a Senior Audit Manager with Hein & Associates LLP, a public accounting and consulting firm.

     Michael Eblin has served as our Chief Operating Officer since February 2002. Mr. Eblin served as the Senior Vice President of Operations of EFTC from July 2000 to February 2002. From 1995 to June 2000, Mr. Eblin was Director of Operations of Sony Corporation. Prior to that, Mr. Eblin held various management positions in the Electronics Controls division of United Technologies and Hughes Electronics, part of General Motors Corporation, an automobile manufacturer and communications systems and financial services provider.

     R. Michael Gibbons has served as our Executive Vice President of New Business Development since February 2002. Mr. Gibbons served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of K*TEC from May 2000 to February 2002. From January 1998 to May 2000, Mr. Gibbons served as Executive Vice President and General Manager of K*TEC and from February 1997 to January 1998 as Corporate Quality Director of K*TEC. From July 1984 to February 1997, Mr. Gibbons worked in various capacities in the electronics manufacturing industry at Schlumberger Oilfield Services.

     Oscar A. Hager has served as our Vice President of Human Resources since February 2002. Mr. Hager served as EFTC’s Vice President of Human Resources from November 2000 to February 2002. From April 1999 to October 2000, Mr. Hager was EFTC’s Director of Human Resources for Southwest Commercial Operations. Prior to joining EFTC, Mr. Hager spent fifteen years with Honeywell’s Commercial Aviation group, a manufacturer of commercial avionics equipment, in various human resource management capacities. Prior to joining Honeywell, Mr. Hager held various human resource positions in the aerospace industry.

     Peter W. Harper has served as our Chief Financial Officer and Secretary since May 2001. Mr. Harper has served as the Chief Financial Officer of EFTC since July 2000. From 1996 to June 2000, Mr. Harper served as Vice President of Finance at Iomega Corporation, a company that designs, manufactures and markets personal and professional storage solutions for users of personal computers and consumer electronics devices. Prior to that, Mr. Harper spent 12 years in various management positions at General Electric Company.

     John H. Kulp has served as our Vice President of Sales and Marketing since February 2002. Mr. Kulp served as the Vice President of Sales and Marketing of EFTC from December 2001 to February 2002. From October 1999 to August 2001, Mr. Kulp served as Vice President of Sales at FlexTek Incorporated, a supplier of electromechanical subassemblies. From 1979 to October 1999, Mr. Kulp served in various capacities, most recently as regional sales manager, at AMP Inc., a supplier of electrical and electronic connections and interconnection systems.

     Kevin Sauer has served as our Vice President of Information Technology since February 2002. Mr. Sauer served as Vice President of Information Technology of K*TEC from May 2001 to February 2002. From May 1997 to April 2001, Mr. Sauer held various management and information technology-related positions with K*TEC. From November 1993 to May 1997, Mr. Sauer served in various capacities at Schlumberger, most recently as a Quality Assurance Manager.

     Allen S. Braswell, Jr. has served as a director since October 2001. Mr. Braswell has engaged in private investment activities as his principal occupation since December 2000. From September 1999 until such time, Mr. Braswell served as President of Jabil Global Services, a subsidiary of Jabil Circuit, Inc. engaged in electronic product service and repair, which was purchased by EFTC from affiliates of Mr. Braswell in September 1997 and sold to Jabil Circuit in September 1999. Mr. Braswell also served as President of the predecessors of Jabil Global Services since October 1996.

     Fred A. Breidenbach has served as a director since October 2001. Mr. Breidenbach has served as the principal of FA Breidenbach & Associates, LLC, a management consulting firm providing services to the aerospace industry, since November 1997. From April 1993 until July 1997, Mr. Breidenbach served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation (now a subsidiary of General Dynamics).

     Jeffrey W. Goettman has served as our Chairman of the Board and a director since May 2001. Mr. Goettman has served as a Managing Partner of Thayer Capital Partners, a private equity investment company, since April 2001. Mr. Goettman joined Thayer Capital Partners in February 1998. From February 1994 to February 1998,