e10vk
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
|
þ ANNUAL REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2006
|
or
|
o TRANSITION REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number 1-8703
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
(Exact Name of Registrant as
Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or Other Jurisdiction
of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
33-0956711
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
20511 Lake Forest Drive
Lake Forest, California
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
92630
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(949) 672-7000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name of each exchange
|
Title of each class
|
|
on which registered
|
|
Common Stock, $.01 Par
Value Per Share
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Rights to Purchase
Series A Junior
|
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
|
Participating Preferred
Stock
|
|
|
|
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Exchange
Act. Yes o No þ
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 registrants 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. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated
filer þ Accelerated
filer o Non-accelerated
filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the registrants common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant on December 30,
2005, the last business day of the registrants most
recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately
$4.0 billion, based on the closing sale price as reported
on the New York Stock Exchange.
As of the close of business on November 10, 2006,
221.7 million shares of common stock, par value
$.01 per share, were outstanding.
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
INDEX
TO ANNUAL REPORT ON
FORM 10-K
For
the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006
Typically, our fiscal year ends on the Friday nearest to
June 30 and consists of 52 weeks. However,
approximately every six years, we report a
53-week
fiscal year to align our fiscal quarters with calendar quarters
by adding a week to our fourth fiscal quarter. The 2006 and 2005
fiscal years, which ended on June 30, 2006 and July 1,
2005, respectively, consisted of 52 weeks each. Fiscal year
2004, which ended on July 2, 2004, was a
53-week
year. Unless otherwise indicated, references herein to specific
years and quarters are to our fiscal years and fiscal quarters,
and references to financial information are on a consolidated
basis. As used herein, the terms we, us,
our and WD refer to Western Digital
Corporation and its subsidiaries.
We are a Delaware corporation that operates as the parent
company of our hard drive business, Western Digital
Technologies, Inc., which was formed in 1970.
Our principal executive offices are located at 20511 Lake Forest
Drive, Lake Forest, California 92630. Our telephone number is
(949) 672-7000
and our web site is http://www.westerndigital.com. The
information on our web site is not incorporated in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
Western
Digital®,
WD®,
the WD logo, WD
Caviar®,
WD
Raptor®,
WD
Scorpiotm,
WD
Passporttm
and My
Booktm
are trademarks of Western Digital Technologies, Inc.
and/or its
affiliates. All other trademarks mentioned are the property of
their respective owners.
2
Forward-Looking
Statements
This document contains forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the federal securities laws. Any statements that do
not relate to historical or current facts or matters are
forward-looking statements. You can identify some of the
forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking words,
such as may, will, could,
project, believe,
anticipate, expect,
estimate, continue,
potential, plan, forecasts,
and the like, or the use of future tense. Statements concerning
current conditions may also be forward-looking if they imply a
continuation of current conditions. Examples of forward-looking
statements include, but are not limited to, statements
concerning:
|
|
|
|
|
growth in demand for hard drives in the desktop, mobile,
enterprise and consumer electronics markets and factors
contributing to such growth;
|
|
|
|
our expansion into new hard drive markets, such as consumer
electronics, retail, and enterprise and into emerging geographic
markets;
|
|
|
|
increase in our sales of notebook hard drives and our
on-going volume ramp of our
Scorpiotm
2.5-inch
hard drives;
|
|
|
|
our planned use of new recording technologies;
|
|
|
|
expectations regarding traditional seasonal demand trends and
price declines for the hard drive industry;
|
|
|
|
beliefs regarding the sufficiency of our cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments to meet our working
capital needs; and
|
|
|
|
beliefs regarding our operating performance and general
industry conditions and their impacts on the realization of our
deferred tax assets and the need to reduce all or a portion of
our valuation allowance.
|
Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ
materially from those expressed in the forward-looking
statements. You are urged to carefully review the disclosures we
make concerning risks and other factors that may affect our
business and operating results, including those made in
Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
as well as our other reports filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC). You are cautioned not to
place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which
speak only as of the date of this document. We do not intend,
and undertake no obligation, to publish revised forward-looking
statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of
this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated
events.
3
PART I
General
We design, develop, manufacture and sell hard drives. A hard
drive is a device that uses one or more rotating magnetic disks
to store and allow fast access to data. Hard drives are key
components of computers, data storage subsystems and many
consumer electronic devices.
We sell our products worldwide to original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs) for use in computer systems,
subsystems or consumer electronics (CE) devices, and
to distributors, resellers and retailers. Our hard drives are
used in desktop computers, notebook computers, and enterprise
applications such as servers, workstations, network attached
storage and storage area networks. Additionally, our hard drives
are used in CE applications such as digital video recorders
(DVRs), satellite and cable set-top boxes
(STBs), MP3 players, and USB thumb drives. We also
sell our hard drives as stand-alone storage products and
integrate them into our own WD-branded external storage products
for purposes such as personal data backup and portable or
expanded storage of digital music, photography, video, and other
data.
Hard drives provide non-volatile data storage, which means that
the data remains present when power is no longer applied to the
device. Our hard drives currently include
3.5-inch,
2.5-inch and
1.0-inch
form factor drives. The
3.5-inch
form factor drives have capacities ranging from 36 gigabytes
(GB) to 500 GB, nominal rotation speeds of 7,200 and
10,000 revolutions per minute (RPM), and offer
interfaces including both Enhanced Integrated Drive Electronics
(EIDE) and Serial Advanced Technology Attachment
(SATA). The
2.5-inch
form factor drives have capacities ranging from 40 GB to 160 GB,
nominal rotation speed of 5,400 RPM, and offer both the EIDE and
SATA interfaces. Our
1.0-inch
form factor, with 4 and 6 GB hard drives, used primarily in
miniature portable storage devices, have a nominal rotation
speed of 3,600 RPM and use the
CompactFlash®
130 interface.
We assemble hard drives in Malaysia and Thailand. We also design
and manufacture a substantial portion of our required magnetic
heads, head gimbal assemblies (HGAs) and head stack
assemblies (HSAs) in Fremont, California and Bang
Pa-In, Thailand. For geographical financial data, see
Part II, Item 8, Note 10 in the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements, included in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
Business
Strategy
Our business strategy is to provide a broad selection of
reliable, high quality hard drives at a low total cost of
ownership and with high efficiency. We believe this strategy
helps accomplish the following:
|
|
|
|
|
distinguishes us in the dynamic and competitive hard drive
industry;
|
|
|
|
provides great value to our customers; and
|
|
|
|
allows us to better achieve consistent financial performance,
including strong returns on invested capital.
|
We have designed our business strategy to accommodate
significant unit and revenue growth with relatively small
increases in operating expenses and to consistently achieve high
asset utilization.
Industry
We develop and manufacture hard drives for the desktop, mobile,
enterprise, CE and retail markets. We believe that growth in the
sales of hard drives has outpaced growth in the sales of all
desktop and notebook computers (PCs) over the past
five years. Based on industry data, in calendar 2001 there were
approximately 50% more hard drives sold in the market than PCs.
In contrast, in calendar 2005 there were approximately 74% more
hard drives sold in the market than PCs. We believe the
following factors primarily drive this accelerating growth of
hard drive sales versus PC sales:
|
|
|
|
|
consumer use of hard drives for the playing, retention, and
creation of digital content for personal use in the rapidly
growing CE market;
|
|
|
|
growth of the external hard drive or branded products market,
permitting the easy storage and backup of data such as music or
digital photographs;
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
increased use of multiple hard drives in PCs for data backup and
expanded storage capacity; and
|
|
|
|
increased use of multiple cost-optimized high performance hard
drives in data-intensive applications such as Internet search
engines.
|
These factors and our product expansion efforts in the last two
years have gradually increased our percentage of revenue derived
from non-desktop sources. In 2006, 71% of our revenue was from
desktop computers and 29% was from non-desktop sources, compared
to 79% of our revenue from desktop computers and 21% from
non-desktop sources in 2005.
For further discussion of the risks of the hard drive industry,
please see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
PC
Market
The PC market consists of the overall hard drive market for
desktop and notebook computers. Consumers use PCs in homes,
businesses and multi-user networks. PCs use software
applications for word processing, spreadsheet, desktop
publishing, database management, multimedia, entertainment and
for other needs. Hard drives store both PC software applications
and the data used by the applications.
We believe that the demand for hard drives in the PC market has
grown in part due to:
|
|
|
|
|
the overall growth of PC sales;
|
|
|
|
the increasing needs of businesses and individuals for increased
storage capacity on their PCs;
|
|
|
|
the continuing development of software applications to manage
multimedia content; and
|
|
|
|
the increasing use of broadband Internet, including content
downloaded from the Internet onto PC hard drives.
|
We believe several other factors affect the rate of PC unit
growth, including maturing PC markets in North America and
Western Europe, an increase in first-time buyers of PCs in Asia,
Eastern Europe and Latin America, and the lengthening of PC
replacement cycles.
Mobile
Market
We expect the mobile market, which consists primarily of
notebook computers, to continue to grow faster than the desktop
or enterprise markets in the next three years. We believe that
the demand in the mobile market has grown from approximately 16%
of the overall hard drive market in calendar 2003 to 21% of the
overall hard drive market in calendar 2005.
As the mobile market evolves to a higher volume market, we
believe customers are placing increased emphasis on attributes
such as quality, reliability, execution, flexibility, and
competitive cost structures of their hard drive suppliers. These
are the same attributes that have mattered for many years to
customers in the high-volume desktop market.
Enterprise
Market
The enterprise market for hard drives includes workstations,
servers, network attached storage, storage area networks, and
other computing systems or subsystems. Historically, hard drives
for this market segment have utilized several interfaces,
including the Small Computer Systems Interface
(SCSI) and Fibre Channel Arbitrated Loop. Beginning
in 2003, these traditional enterprise interfaces have been
supplemented or have been replaced in certain storage
applications by SATA hard drives featuring an interface
technology supported by industry standards. SATA hard drives
typically cost less than SCSI hard drives while offering higher
capacities and maintaining similar reliability, scalability and
performance.
We believe that enterprise uses of SATA hard drives will
continue to increase. During the past few years a new disk-based
back-up
application has emerged with high-capacity SATA hard drives
augmenting SCSI hard drives, tape and optical media. This new
application, popularly referred to as near-line
storage, has created a growth market because hard drives
back-up or
access data more quickly than tape or optical solutions, and
quickly retrieve critical
back-up or
near-line data. The availability of SATA hard drive solutions,
which are more cost effective than SCSI hard drives, promotes
the increasing use of hard drives in near-line storage
applications.
5
Enterprise-class SATA drives are becoming commonplace for
IT infrastructure applications such as databases, scientific
computing, web caching and electronic mail. These applications
have become an important market for large capacity SATA hard
drives. We believe that this market will consume a growing
portion of the highest capacity hard drives in the next three
years.
Consumer
Electronics Market
The use of hard drives in CE products has been a major growth
area in recent years. Todays three largest segments of
this market are:
|
|
|
|
|
digital video content in applications such as DVRs;
|
|
|
|
audio and video content in applications such as consumer
handheld devices, including MP3 players; and
|
|
|
|
hard drives in game consoles.
|
Since 1999, DVRs have been available for use in home
entertainment systems and they offer enhanced capabilities such
as pausing live television, simplifying the process of
recording, cataloging recorded television programs and quickly
forwarding or returning to any section of a recorded television
program. Additionally, digital video disk (DVD)
recorders increasingly incorporate hard drives to allow for DVR
functionality and faster recording of content onto removable
DVDs. The market for these products favors large capacity hard
drives and continues to grow in Japan, North America, and
Europe. Additionally, the rest of Asia Pacific shows strong
interest in this market. We believe growth in this market will
continue to build demand for higher capacity hard drives.
Hard drives with
1.8-inch or
1.0-inch
form factors primarily address the consumer handheld device and
portable external storage markets. The majority of hard drives
used in portable media players that play both digital audio and
video content are
1.8-inch
form factors.
External
Hard Drive Market
Most new PC systems include high-speed external interfaces, such
as
FireWiretm,
USB 2.0 or Ethernet network connections that permit users to
supplement the storage space of their PC systems or home and
small office networks with the use of external hard drives.
Users store additional programs or multimedia content, and back
up internal hard drives with external hard drives. Although
external hard drives are a small part of the overall hard drive
market, we believe that sales will continue to grow. External
storage can often be the easiest, quickest or only way of adding
additional storage capacity to either a desktop or notebook
computer. In addition, there is opportunity for external storage
in CE products as a way of expanding storage capacity in these
devices.
Other
Market Opportunities
We regularly review opportunities to apply our knowledge of data
storage technology to markets that we do not currently serve.
Based on significant investments we made over the last four
years, we believe we now have the technology building blocks to
increase our overall market penetration and be a full-line hard
drive supplier. Consistent with our measured and deliberate
approach to new market entries in the recent past, our approach
to additional new markets will be based on a careful assessment
of the risks, rewards, requirements and profit potential of such
actions.
Products
We offer a broad line of hard drives designed for various
markets. We market our hard drives under brand names including
WD
Caviar®,
WD
Raptor®,
WD
Scorpiotm,
WD
Passporttm
and My
Booktm.
These hard drives service the desktop, mobile, enterprise, CE
and branded products markets, and can be found in products
including desktop
6
computers, notebook computers, enterprise storage, workstations,
video surveillance equipment, networking products, DVRs, STBs
and external storage devices.
Desktop
Hard Drive Products
Our hard drives designed for the desktop market currently
consist of
3.5-inch
form factor products with capacities ranging from 36 GB to 500
GB and a nominal rotation speed of 7,200 RPM. These products
utilize either the EIDE or SATA interfaces, providing high
performance while retaining ease of use and overall low cost of
connection. The type of EIDE interface currently used in our
hard drives is ATA/100, which signifies a burst data transfer
rate of 100 megabytes per second, which is the maximum
specified data transition that can be sustained under ideal
conditions. The SATA interface available in many of our hard
drives enable burst transfer rates of up to 300 megabytes
per second.
Mobile
Hard Drive Products
Our hard drives used in mobile products typically include
2.5-inch
form factor drives for notebook computers. Although the desktop
market accounts for a majority of hard drive sales, unit
shipments of hard drives for notebook computers represent a
growing share of the total. In 2005, we introduced our WD
Scorpiotm
hard drive family consisting of
2.5-inch
form factor products with capacities ranging from 40 GB to 80 GB
and a nominal rotation speed of 5,400 RPM. These products
utilize the EIDE interface. In January 2006, we expanded our WD
Scorpiotm
line with 100 GB and 120 GB offerings, enabling us to address a
greater share of the
2.5-inch
mobile market. In addition, we added a family of products with
the SATA interface in March 2006. In July 2006, we added an 80
GB-per-platter
2.5 inch drive with perpendicular magnetic recording (PMR)
technology to the WD
Scorpiotm
family providing as much as 160 GB total drive capacity.
Enterprise
Hard Drive Products
We offer multiple product lines to address enterprise market
needs, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the WD
Raptor®,
which is a 10,000 RPM enterprise-class drive with the SATA
interface for enterprise applications requiring high performance
and high reliability; and
|
|
|
|
the WD
Caviar®
RAID Edition (RE), which is a 7,200 RPM drive with capacities
ranging from 120 GB to 500 GB. The WD
Caviar®
RE includes both SATA and EIDE interfaces and has enhanced
reliability features and ratings when contrasted to our desktop
products.
|
Both WD
Raptor®
and WD
Caviar®
RE drives may be used in, but are not limited to, applications
such as databases,
e-commerce
and super computing in life science, oil and gas and similar
industries, business records management,
e-mail, file
serving, web serving, near-line storage, medical records,
engineering data management, video broadcasting and video
security.
Consumer
Electronics Products
We offer hard drives designed for use in products such as DVRs,
STBs, karaoke systems, multi-function printers, and gaming
systems. These products deliver the characteristics CE
manufacturers seek most quiet operation, low
temperature and power consumption specifications, high
reliability and optimized streaming capabilities.
Branded
Products
We also sell a line of branded hard drive products and related
adapters directly to end customers through retail store fronts
and online stores. These include:
|
|
|
|
|
3.5-inch,
2.5-inch and
1.0-inch
form factor external hard drives, which are internal drives
embedded into PC peripheral-style enclosures with the WD
brand that have
FireWiretm,
USB 2.0 and Ethernet network connections; and
|
|
|
|
internal hard drives packaged as an installation kit with the WD
brand for retail store sales.
|
7
Research
and Development
We devote substantial resources to development of new products
and improvement of existing products. We focus our engineering
efforts on coordinating our product design and manufacturing
processes to bring our products to market in a cost-effective
and timely manner. Research and development expenses totaled
$297 million, $240 million and $202 million in
2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
For further discussion of risks related to our development of
new products, see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Technology
and Product Development
Hard drives record, store and retrieve digital data. Performance
attributes of hard drives, such as their ability to access and
transmit data and storage capacity, are currently better than
removable or floppy disks, optical hard drives and tapes, and
they are more cost effective than semiconductor technology. The
primary measures of hard drive performance include:
|
|
|
|
|
Storage capacity the amount of data that
can be stored on the hard drive commonly expressed
in GB. As defined in the hard drive industry, one GB equals one
billion bytes. A byte is a digital character, typically
comprised of eight bits. A bit is a binary digit, the smallest
unit of information in a digital system.
|
|
|
|
Average seek time the time needed to
position the heads over a selected track on the disk
surface commonly expressed in milliseconds.
|
|
|
|
Internal data transfer rate the
sustained rate of data transfer to and from the disk
commonly expressed in megabits per second. One megabit equals
one million bits.
|
|
|
|
Spindle rotational speed the nominal
rotational speed of the disks inside the hard drive
commonly expressed in RPM, revolutions per minute or latency.
Spindle rotational speeds commonly stated as 5,400, 7,200 and
10,000 RPM are sometimes approximations.
|
|
|
|
Acoustics the sound power emitted during
hard drive operation commonly expressed in decibels.
|
All of our hard drive products employ similar technology. The
main components of the hard drive are a head disk assembly and a
printed circuit board. The head disk assembly includes heads,
media (disks), head positioning mechanism (actuator) and spindle
motor. A hard base plate protective package in a
contamination-controlled environment contain these components.
The printed circuit board includes both standard and custom
integrated circuits, an interface connector to the host computer
and a power connector.
One or more disks positioned around a motor-driven spindle hub
that rotates the disks comprises the head disk assembly. A thin
coating of magnetic materials applied to a smooth substrate make
the disk. Each disk has a head suspended directly above it,
which can read data from or write data to the spinning disk.
The integrated circuits on the printed circuit board typically
include a drive interface and a controller. The drive interface
receives instructions from the computer, while the controller
directs the flow of data to or from the disks and controls the
heads. The location of data on each disk is logically maintained
in concentric tracks divided into sectors. The computer sends
instructions to the controller to read data from or write data
to the disks based on logical track and sector locations. Guided
by instructions from the controller, the head stack assembly
pivots and swings across the disk by a head actuator or motor
until it reaches the selected track of a disk, where the data is
recorded or retrieved.
Industry standard interfaces allow the hard drive to communicate
with the computer. Currently, the primary interfaces for PCs are
EIDE and SATA, and the primary interface for enterprise systems
is SCSI. As computer performance continues to improve, the hard
drive will need to deliver information faster. We believe this
will continue to drive the PC industry transition to higher
speed interfaces, such as SATA, to handle the higher data
transfer rates. We currently offer our WD
Caviar®,
7,200 RPM drives with the SATA interface and featuring
capacities as large as 500 GB. We design these products for the
PC, workstation, server, and external storage markets. We
believe that SATA is also becoming a more popular interface in
the enterprise market. We currently offer our WD
Raptor®,
a 10,000 RPM enterprise-class drive with the SATA interface, and
the WD
Caviar®
RE and RE2, 7,200 RPM drives manufactured to enterprise-class
standards and available with a SATA interface.
8
The number of disks and each disks areal density, which is
a measure of the amount of data that can be stored on the
recording surface of the disk, determines storage capacity of
the hard drive. The higher the areal density, the more
information can be stored on a single platter. Achieving a given
drive capacity requires fewer disks as the areal density
increases, potentially reducing product costs over time through
reduced component requirements. Beginning in July 2006, we began
shipping
3.5-inch
hard drives with 160 GB per platter areal density and
2.5-inch
hard drives with 80 GB per platter areal density.
Head technology is one of the variables affecting areal density.
Historically, there have been rapid technological changes
resulting in several generations of head technology in a
relatively short time. However, in recent years the time has
lengthened between changes in generations of head technology.
Currently, the desktop hard drive industry uses giant
magnetoresistive (including tunneling magnetoresistive) head
technology, which allows significantly higher storage capacities
than the previously utilized thin-film head technology. Most of
our hard drive product offerings currently employ giant
magnetoresistive head technology. Additionally, we have
undertaken significant development efforts to implement
perpendicular recording technology and we began using
perpendicular recording heads in certain products beginning in
July 2006.
The WD product line generally leverages a common platform for
various products within product families with different
capacities to serve differing market needs. This platform
strategy results in commonality of components across different
products within product families and, in some cases, across
product families, which reduces exposure to changes in demand,
facilitates inventory management and allows us to achieve lower
costs through purchasing economies. This platform strategy also
enables our customers to leverage their qualification efforts
onto successive product models.
In addition to the development of hard drives, we also invest
considerable resources in the development of WD head technology
used in the majority of our hard drive products. The design and
manufacturing of WD heads consists of engineering and
fabricating a read element for reading data from a disk, a write
element for writing data to a disk, and slider. The slider
functions similar to an airplane wing and allows the read and
write elements to fly over the surface of the disk and to land,
on either the disk or a special ramp, when power is not applied
to the hard drive.
Fiscal 2006 represented the fourth consecutive year of
substantial growth in our research and development and capital
spending to support our significant broadening of our product
and technology portfolios. Over that four-year period, we have
grown our investment spending over 250% from $168 million
in fiscal 2002 to approximately $600 million in fiscal
2006. As a result of this investment activity, we continue to
expand our business beyond the desktop market into newer markets
or markets in which we have not previously participated. Such
investments have allowed us to execute against our strategic
objective of revenue diversification to address the growth of
new applications for hard drives and fast-growing new market
opportunities.
For an additional discussion of risks related to technological
innovations, see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Sales and
Distribution
We sell our products globally to OEMs, distributors and
retailers. OEMs purchase our hard drives and assemble them into
the computer or other CE systems they build. Distributors
typically sell our hard drives to non-direct customers such as
small computer and CE manufacturers, dealers, systems
integrators, online retailers and other resellers. Retailers
typically sell our hard drive products directly to end-users.
Original
Equipment Manufacturers
Sales to OEMs accounted for 54%, 58% and 51% of our revenue in
2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. During 2006, our major OEM
customer was Dell. During 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales to Dell
accounted for 12%, 16%, and 14%, respectively, of our revenue.
We believe that our success depends on our ability to maintain
and improve our strong relationships with the leading OEMs.
OEMs evaluate and select their hard drive suppliers based on a
number of factors, including quality and reliability, storage
capacities, performance characteristics, price, service and
support, ease of doing business, and the suppliers
long-term financial stability. They typically seek to qualify
two or more providers for each generation of hard drives, and
once an OEM has chosen its qualified hard drive vendors for a
given product, it generally will purchase hard drives from those
vendors for the life of that product. To achieve success with
OEM qualifications, a hard drive supplier must consistently
offer hard drives featuring leading technology, quality, and
reliability at acceptable capacity per disk. Suppliers must
9
quickly achieve volume production of each new generation of high
quality and reliable hard drives, requiring access to flexible,
high-capacity, high-quality manufacturing capabilities.
Many of our OEM customers utilize
just-in-time
inventory management processes or supply chain business models
that combine
build-to-order,
in which the OEM does not build until there is a firm order, and
contract manufacturing, in which the OEM contracts
assembly work to a contract manufacturer who purchases
components and assembles the computer based on the OEMs
instructions. For certain OEMs, we maintain a base stock of
finished goods inventory in facilities located near or adjacent
to the OEMs operations.
For an additional discussion of risks related to our need to
adapt to our customers business models and maintain
customer satisfaction, refer to Item 1A of this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
Distributors
We use a select group of distributors to sell our products to
non-direct customers such as small computer and
CE manufacturers, dealers, systems integrators, online
retailers and other resellers. Distributors accounted for
approximately 39%, 36% and 42% of our revenue for 2006, 2005 and
2004, respectively. Distributors generally enter into
non-exclusive agreements for specific territories with us for
purchase and redistribution of product. We grant our
distributors limited price protection rights.
Retailers
We sell our branded products directly to a select group of major
retailers such as computer superstores, warehouse clubs and
computer electronics stores, and authorize sales through
distributors to smaller retailers. Retailers accounted for
approximately 7%, 6% and 7% of our revenue for 2006, 2005 and
2004, respectively. Our current retail customer base is
primarily in the United States, Canada and Europe. The retail
channel complements our other sales channels while helping to
build brand awareness for WD and our products. Retailers supply
end-users with products to upgrade their computers and
externally store their data for backup purposes. We grant our
retailers price protection and limited rights to return product
on an inventory rotation basis. We also sell our branded
products through the Internet, at our web site.
Sales and
Marketing
We maintain sales offices in selected parts of the world
including the major geographies of the Americas, Asia Pacific,
Japan, Europe and the Middle East. Our international sales,
which include sales to foreign subsidiaries of
U.S. companies but do not include sales to
U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies, represented 68%,
65% and 63% of our revenue for 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Sales to international customers may be subject to
certain risks not normally encountered in domestic operations,
including exposure to tariffs and various trade regulations. For
further discussion regarding the risks related to sales to
international customers, see Item 1A of this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K.
For additional information concerning revenue recognition, sales
by geographic region and significant customer information, see
Part II, Item 8 Notes 1 and 10 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
We perform our marketing and advertising functions internally
and through outside firms. We target advertising, worldwide
packaging and marketing materials to various reseller and
end-user categories. We utilize both consumer media and, to a
lesser extent, trade publications. We have programs under which
we reimburse qualified distributors and retailers for certain
marketing expenditures. We also maintain customer relationships
by communicating with our resellers and providing end-users with
information and support through our web site.
Competition
We compete primarily with manufacturers of hard drives for
desktop, mobile, enterprise and CE products. Our competitors in
the hard drive market include Fujitsu Limited, Hitachi Global
Storage Technologies, Samsung Electronics Incorporated, Seagate
Technology and Toshiba Corporation. In 2006, Seagate completed
the acquisition of Maxtor Corporation which, at the time of the
acquisition, was one of the hard drive industrys four
largest suppliers.
The hard drive industry is intensely competitive, with hard
drive suppliers competing for sales to a limited number of major
customers. Hard drives manufactured by different competitors are
highly substitutable due to the industry mandate of technical
form, fit and function standards. Hard drive manufacturers
compete on the basis of product quality
10
and reliability, storage capacity, unit price, product
performance, production volume capabilities, delivery
capability, leadership in
time-to-market,
time-to-volume
and
time-to-quality,
service and support, and ease of doing business. The relative
importance of these factors varies between customer and market
segments. We believe that we are generally competitive in all of
these factors.
We believe that there are no substantial barriers for existing
competitors to offer competing products. Therefore, we believe
that we cannot differentiate WD hard drive products solely on
attributes such as storage capacity, buffer size or
time-to-market.
Accordingly, we differentiate WD by focusing on operational
excellence, high product quality and reliability, and designing
and incorporating into our hard drives desirable product
performance attributes. Such performance attributes include seek
times, data transfer rates, intelligent caching, failure
prediction, remote diagnostics, acoustics and data recovery. In
addition, we emphasize non-product related attributes, including
rapid response to our customers. Rapid response requires
accelerated design cycles, customer delivery, production
flexibility and timely service and support, which contribute to
customer satisfaction. We also rely on the strength of the WD
brand name with value-added resellers and solution providers to
whom we sell our hard drive products directly and indirectly. We
believe that trust in a manufacturers reputation, its
execution track record and the establishment of strategic
relationships have become important factors in the selection of
a hard drive, particularly in a rapidly changing technology
environment.
Advances in magnetic, optical or other data storage technologies
could result in competitive products with better performance or
lower cost per unit of capacity than our products. High-speed
semiconductor memory could compete with our hard drive products
in the future. Semiconductor memory is much faster than magnetic
hard drives, but currently is not competitive from a cost
standpoint. Flash memory, a non-volatile semiconductor memory,
is currently much more costly and, while it has higher
read performance attributes than hard drives, it has
lower write performance attributes. Flash memory
could become competitive in the near future for applications
requiring less storage capacity than that provided by hard
drives.
For an additional discussion of risks related to competition,
see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Service
and Warranty
We generally warrant our newly manufactured hard drives against
defects in materials and workmanship from one to five years from
the date of manufacture depending on the type of product. Our
warranty obligation is generally limited to repair or
replacement of the hard drive. We have engaged third parties in
Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Hungary, India,
Korea, Russia, Singapore, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates
to provide various levels of testing, processing
and/or
recertification of returned hard drives for our customers. In
addition, we process, test and recertify returned hard drives at
our facility in the United States.
Manufacturing
We believe that we have significant know-how, unique product
manufacturing processes, execution skills and human resources to
continue to be successful and have the ability to grow, as
necessary, our manufacturing operations. To be competitive, we
must manufacture high quality hard drives with industry leading
time-to-volume
production at competitive unit costs. We strive to maintain
manufacturing flexibility, high manufacturing yields, and
reliable products, while insisting that our suppliers provide
high-quality components at competitive prices. The critical
elements of our hard drive production are high volume, low cost
assembly and testing, and establishment and maintenance of key
supplier relationships. By establishing close relationships with
our strategic component suppliers, we believe we access
best-of-class
manufacturing quality. In addition, we believe that our sourcing
strategy currently enables us to have the business flexibility
needed to select the highest quality low cost of ownership
suppliers as product designs and technologies evolve.
Hard drive manufacturing is a complex process involving the
assembly of precision components with narrow tolerances and
thorough testing. The assembly process occurs in a clean
room environment that demands skill in process engineering
and efficient space utilization to control the operating costs
of this manufacturing environment. Our clean room manufacturing
process consists of modular production units, each of which
contains a number of work cells.
We manufacture hard drives in Malaysia and Thailand. We
continually evaluate our manufacturing processes in an effort to
increase productivity, sustain and improve quality and decrease
manufacturing costs. For example, during 2002, in response to an
increase in demand and to capitalize on the local supplier base,
we completed the acquisition of a
11
Thailand manufacturing facility. We continually evaluate which
steps in the manufacturing process would benefit from automation
and how automated manufacturing processes can improve
productivity and reduce manufacturing costs.
In July 2003, we purchased substantially all of the assets of
Read-Rite Corporation, formerly one of our suppliers of heads,
including its wafer fabrication equipment in Fremont, California
and its slider fabrication facility in Bang Pa-In, Thailand. We
upgraded and enhanced these facilities to meet the demands of
new technologies consistent with our hard drive production
facilities. We use these facilities to design and manufacture a
substantial portion of the heads, HGAs and HSAs we include in
the hard drives we manufacture.
For an additional discussion of risks related to manufacturing,
see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Materials
and Supplies
The principal components currently used in the manufacture of
our hard drives are magnetic heads and related HGAs, HSAs,
media, controllers, spindle motors and mechanical parts used in
the head disk assembly. We use both custom and standard
semiconductor components such as logic, memory and
microprocessor devices obtained from other manufacturers, as
well as a wide variety of other parts, including printed circuit
boards, connectors, cables, and other interconnect technology.
We also design and manufacture a substantial portion of the
heads required for the hard drives we manufacture. We purchase a
portion of these components from third party suppliers.
We acquire all of the remaining components for our products from
third party suppliers. We generally retain multiple suppliers
for each of our component requirements but in some instances use
sole sources for business reasons. For example, during 2006, we
purchased media from several outside vendors including Fuji
Electric, Hoya Corp., Komag Inc. and Showa Denko KK. We have
volume purchase agreements with Komag Inc. and Showa Denko KK
which obligate us to purchase from each supplier, and obligates
each supplier to supply to us, certain specified media volumes
in accordance with the terms in the agreements.
We sole-source some components, such as custom integrated
circuit devices for certain products from STMicroelectronics and
Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. Because of their custom nature,
these products require significant design-in periods and long
lead times. There has been a trend in integrated circuit design
toward increased integration of various separate circuits. We
expect this trend to continue in custom integrated circuits for
hard drives.
For an additional discussion of risks related to our component
supplies, see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Backlog
Historically, a substantial portion of our orders has been for
shipments of hard drives within 30 to 60 days of the
placement of the order. We generally negotiate pricing, order
lead times, product support requirements and other terms and
conditions before receiving a computer manufacturers first
purchase order for a product. Customers purchase orders
typically may be canceled with relatively short notice to us,
with little or no cost to the customer, or modified by customers
to provide for delivery at a later date. In addition, we make
many of our sales to OEMs under
just-in-time
delivery contracts that do not generally require firm order
commitments by the customer until the time of sale. Instead, we
receive a periodic forecast of requirements from the customer
and invoice the customer upon shipment of the product from the
just-in-time
warehouse. Therefore, backlog information as of the end of a
particular period is not necessarily indicative of future levels
of our revenue and profit and may not be comparable to earlier
periods.
Patents,
Licenses and Proprietary Information
We own numerous patents and have many patent applications in
process. We believe that, although our patents and patent
applications have considerable value, the successful
manufacturing and marketing of our products depends primarily
upon the technical and managerial competence of our personnel.
Accordingly, the patents held and applied for do not ensure our
future success.
In addition to patent protection of certain intellectual
property rights, we consider elements of our product designs and
processes to be proprietary and confidential. We believe that
our non-patented intellectual property, particularly some of our
process technology, is an important factor in our success. We
rely upon non-disclosure agreements and contractual provisions
and a system of internal safeguards to protect our proprietary
information. Despite these
12
safeguards, there is a risk that competitors may obtain and use
such information. The laws of foreign jurisdictions in which we
conduct business may provide less protection for confidential
information than the United States.
We rely on certain technology that we license from other parties
to manufacture and sell WD products. We believe that we have
adequate cross-licenses and other agreements in place in
addition to our own intellectual property portfolio to compete
successfully in the hard drive industry. For additional
discussion of risks related to our ownership and use of
intellectual property, see Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Environmental
Regulation
We are subject to a variety of regulations in connection with
our operations. We believe that we have obtained or are in the
process of obtaining all necessary environmental permits for our
operations. For additional discussion of risks related to
environmental regulation, see Item 1A of this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K.
Employees
As of June 30, 2006, we employed a total of 24,750
employees worldwide. This represents an increase in headcount of
approximately 7% since July 1, 2005 and an increase of
approximately 42% since July 2, 2004. Many of our employees
are highly skilled, and our continued success depends in part
upon our ability to attract and retain such employees.
Accordingly, we offer employee benefit programs, which we
believe are, in the aggregate, competitive with those offered by
our competitors. We and most of our competitors nevertheless
have difficulty at times in hiring and retaining certain skilled
personnel. We have engaged consultants and contract personnel to
fill these needs until full-time employees could be recruited.
We consider our employee relations to be good.
Available
Information
We maintain an Internet web site at
http://www.westerndigital.com. Our Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q,
Current Reports on
Form 8-K
and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a)
and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
are available on our web site at http://www.westerndigital.com,
free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after the
electronic filing of these reports with the SEC. Any materials
we file with the SEC are available at the SECs Public
Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549.
Additional information about the operation of the Public
Reference Room can also be obtained by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
In addition, the SEC maintains a web site at http://www.sec.gov
that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and
other information regarding issuers that file electronically
with the SEC, including us.
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
Listed below are all of our executive officers as of
June 30, 2006, followed by a brief account of their
business experience during the past five years. Executive
officers are normally appointed annually by the Board of
Directors at a meeting of the directors immediately following
the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. There are no family
relationships among these officers nor any arrangements or
understandings between any officer and any other person pursuant
to which an officer was selected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
Arif Shakeel(1)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
John F. Coyne(1)
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
President, Chief Operating Officer
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Senior Vice President,
Administration, General Counsel and Secretary
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
|
Hossein Moghadam
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Technology Officer
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
As disclosed in the Companys press release on
November 2, 2007, Mr. Coyne will become our President
and Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Shakeel will relinquish
the role of Chief Executive Officer but will continue to be
employed by us as Special Advisor to the Chief Executive
Officer. Mr. Coyne has joined our Board of Directors and
will stand for election at the next Annual Meeting along with
Mr. Shakeel. |
13
Mr. Massengill joined us in 1985 and has served in various
executive capacities. From October 1999 until January 2000, he
served as Chief Operating Officer, from January 2000 until
January 2002, he served as President, and from January 2000
until October 2005, he served as Chief Executive Officer. He has
served as Chairman of the Board since November 2001.
Mr. Shakeel joined us in 1985 and has served in various
executive capacities. From February 2000 until April 2001, he
served as Executive Vice President and General Manager of Hard
Disk Drive Solutions, from April 2001 until January 2003, he
served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer,
and from January 2002 until June 2006, he served as President.
He was named Chief Executive Officer in October 2005.
Mr. Coyne joined us in 1983 and has served in various
executive capacities. From November 2002 until June 2005,
Mr. Coyne served as Senior Vice President, Worldwide
Operations, from June 2005 until September 2005, he served as
Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations and from November
2005 until June 2006, he served as Executive Vice President and
Chief Operations Officer. Effective June 2006, he was named
President, Chief Operating Officer.
Mr. Bukaty joined us in 1999 as Vice President, Corporate
Law. Mr. Bukaty was appointed to Vice President, General
Counsel and Secretary in March 2002, and to Senior Vice
President in January 2004, and assumed his current position as
Senior Vice President, Administration, General Counsel and
Secretary in October 2004.
Mr. Milligan joined us in September 2002 as Vice President,
Finance. He was appointed Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer in January 2004. Before joining us,
Mr. Milligan served in a variety of senior finance
capacities at Dell between April 1997 and September 2002,
including Assistant Controller, European Controller, North
European Finance Director, Director of Finance for the Americas,
and Controller for Dell Financial Services.
Dr. Moghadam joined us in October 2000 as Vice President,
Engineering and site manager of our San Jose facility. He
served as Senior Vice President, Research and Development from
November 2004 to November 2005 and was appointed Senior Vice
President and Chief Technology Officer in November 2005.
Declines
in average selling prices (ASPs) in the hard drive
industry adversely affect our operating results.
The hard drive industry historically has experienced declining
ASPs. Our ASPs tend to decline when competitors lower prices as
a result of decreased costs or to absorb excess capacity,
liquidate excess inventories, restructure or attempt to gain
market share. Our ASPs also decline when there is a shift in the
mix of product sales, and sales of lower priced products
increase relative to those of higher priced products. If ASPs in
the hard drive industry continue to decline, then our ASPs will
also likely decline, which would adversely affect our operating
results.
If we
fail to anticipate or timely respond to changes in the markets
for hard drives, our operating results could be adversely
affected.
Over the past few years the consumer market for computers has
shifted significantly towards lower priced systems. If we are
not able to continue to offer a competitively priced hard drive
for the low-cost PC market, our share of that market will likely
fall, which could harm our operating results.
The market for hard drives is also fragmenting into a variety of
devices and products. Many industry analysts expect, as do we,
that as content increasingly convert to digital technology from
the older, analog technology, the technology of computers and
consumer electronics will continue to converge, and hard drives
will be found in many CE products other than computers.
In addition, we expect that the consumer market for multi-media
applications, including audio-video products, incorporating high
capacity, and handheld consumer storage will continue to grow.
However, because this market remains relatively new, accurate
forecasts for future growth remain challenging. Moreover, some
of the devices, such as personal video recorders and digital
video recorders, or other products outside of the CE market, may
require attributes not currently offered in our products,
resulting in a need to expend capital to develop new interfaces,
form factors, technical specifications or hard drive features,
increasing our overall operational expense without corresponding
incremental revenue at this stage. If we are not successful in
continuing to deploy our hard drive technology and expertise to
develop new products for the emerging CE market, or if we are
required to incur significant costs in developing such products,
it may harm our operating results.
14
Our
prices and margins are subject to declines due to unpredictable
end-user demand and oversupply of hard drives.
Demand for our hard drives depends on the demand for systems
manufactured by our customers and on storage upgrades to
existing systems. The demand for systems has been volatile in
the past and often has had an exaggerated effect on the demand
for hard drives in any given period. As a result, the hard drive
market has experienced periods of excess capacity which can lead
to liquidation of excess inventories and intense price
competition. If intense price competition occurs, we may be
forced to lower prices sooner and more than expected, which
could result in lower revenue and gross margins.
Our
failure to accurately forecast market and customer demand for
our products could adversely affect our business and financial
results.
The hard drive industry faces difficulties in accurately
forecasting market and customer demand for its products. The
variety and volume of products we manufacture is based in part
on these forecasts. If our forecasts exceed actual market
demand, or if market demand decreases significantly from our
forecasts, then we could experience periods of product
oversupply and price decreases, which could impact our financial
performance. If our forecasts do not meet actual market demand,
of if market demand increases significantly beyond our
forecasts, then we may not be able to satisfy customer product
needs, which could result in a loss of market share if our
competitors are able to meet customer demands.
We also use forecasts in making decisions regarding investment
of our resources. For example, as the hard drive industry
transitions from the Parallel Advanced Technology Attachment
(PATA) interface to the SATA interface, we may
invest more resources in the development of products using the
SATA interface. If our forecasts regarding the replacement of
the PATA interface with the SATA interface are inaccurate, we
may not have products available to meet our customers
needs.
In addition, although we receive forecasts from our customers,
they are not obligated to purchase the forecasted amounts. In
particular, sales volumes in the distribution channel are
volatile and harder to predict than sales to our OEM customers.
We consider these forecasts in determining our component needs
and our inventory requirements. If we fail to accurately
forecast our customers product demands, we may have
inadequate or excess inventory of our products or components,
which could adversely affect our operating results.
Increases
in areal density may outpace customers demand for storage
capacity, which may lower the prices our customers are willing
to pay for new products.
Historically, the industry has experienced periods of increased
areal density growth rates. Although in recent years there has
been a decrease in the rate of areal density growth, if industry
conditions return to periods of increased growth rates, the rate
of increase in areal density may exceed the increase in our
customers demand for aggregate storage capacity.
Furthermore, our customers demand for storage capacity may
not continue to grow at current industry estimates as a result
of developments in the regulation and enforcement of digital
rights management or otherwise. These factors could lead to our
customers storage capacity needs being satisfied with
lower capacity hard drives at lower prices, thereby decreasing
our revenue. As a result, even with increasing aggregate demand
for storage capacity, our ASPs could decline, which could
adversely affect our results of operations.
A low
cost structure is critical to our operating results and
increased costs may adversely affect our operating
margins.
A low cost structure for our products, including critical
components, labor and overhead, is critical to the success of
our business and our operating results depend on our ability to
maintain competitive cost structures on new and established
products. If our competitors are able to achieve a lower cost
structure for manufacturing hard drives, and we are unable to
match their cost structure, we could be at a competitive
disadvantage to those competitors. Additionally, there are costs
for certain commodity materials, an increase in which increases
our costs of manufacturing and transporting hard drives and key
components. For example, shortages of materials such as steel
and aluminum increase our costs and may result in lower
operating margins if we are unable to find ways to mitigate
these increased costs. The rising cost of oil also increases our
costs and may result in lower operating margins if we are unable
to pass such increased costs through to our customers.
15
Changes
in product life cycles could adversely affect our financial
results.
Product life cycles have been extending since the middle of
calendar year 2002 due in large part to a decrease in the rate
of hard drive areal density growth. However, there can be no
assurance that this trend will continue. If longer product life
cycles continue, we may need to develop new technologies or
programs to reduce our costs on any particular product to
maintain competitive pricing for that product. This may result
in an increase in our overall expenses and a decrease in our
gross margins, both of which could adversely affect our
operating results. If product life cycles shorten, it may be
more difficult to recover the cost of product development before
the product becomes obsolete. Our failure to recover the cost of
product development in the future could adversely affect our
operating results.
If we
fail to make the technical innovations necessary to continue to
increase areal density, we may fail to remain
competitive.
New products in the hard drive market typically require higher
areal densities than previous product generations, posing
formidable technical and manufacturing challenges. Higher areal
densities require existing head and media technology to be
improved or new technology developed to accommodate more data on
a single disk. In addition, our introduction of new products
during a technology transition increases the likelihood of
unexpected quality concerns. Our failure to bring high quality
new products to market on time and at acceptable costs may put
us at a competitive disadvantage to companies that achieve these
results.
A
fundamental change in recording technology could result in
significant increases in our operating expenses and could put us
at a competitive disadvantage.
Currently the majority of the hard drive industry uses giant
magnetoresistive head technology, which allows significantly
higher storage capacities than the previously utilized thin-film
head technology. However, the industry is developing and now
implementing new recording technologies that may enable greater
recording densities than currently available using
magnetoresistive head technology, including perpendicular,
current
perpendicular-to-plane,
and tunneling junction technology, each of which represent a
significant change in fundamental recording technology. The
industry is experiencing a fundamental shift in recording
technology, this shift in technology is difficult to implement
and historically, when the industry experiences a fundamental
change in technology, any manufacturer that fails to
successfully and timely adjust their designs and processes to
accommodate the new technology, fails to remain competitive.
There are some technologies, such as heat assisted magnetic
recording, that, if they can be implemented by a competitor on a
commercially viable basis, will represent a revolutionary
recording technology that could put us at a competitive
disadvantage.
As a result, we could incur substantial costs in developing new
technologies, such as, heads, media, and tools to remain
competitive. If we fail to successfully implement these new
technologies, or if we are significantly slower than our
competitors at implementing new technologies, we may not be able
to offer products with capacities that our customers desire.
Furthermore, as we attempt to develop and implement new
technologies, we may become more dependent on suppliers to
ensure our access to components that accommodate the new
technology. For example, new recording technology requires
changes in the manufacturing process of media, which may cause
longer production times and reduce the overall availability of
media in the industry. Additionally, the new technology requires
a greater degree of integration between heads and media which
may lengthen our time of development of hard drives using this
technology. These results would increase our operating costs,
which may negatively impact our operating results.
The
difficulty of introducing hard drives with higher levels of
areal density and the challenges of reducing other costs may
impact our ability to achieve historical levels of cost
reduction.
Storage capacity of the hard drive, as manufactured by us, is
determined by the number of disks and each disks areal
density. Areal density is a measure of the amount of magnetic
bits that can be stored on the recording surface of the disk.
Generally, the higher the areal density, the more information
can be stored on a single platter. Historically, we have been
able to achieve a large percentage of cost reduction through
increases in areal density. Increases in areal density mean that
the average drive we sell has fewer heads and disks for the same
capacity and, therefore, may result in a lower component cost.
However, because increases in areal density have become more
difficult in the hard drive industry, such increases may require
increases in component costs. In addition, other opportunities
to reduce costs may not continue at historical rates. Our
inability to achieve cost reductions could adversely affect our
operating results.
16
If we
fail to maintain effective relationships with our major
component suppliers, our supply of critical components may be at
risk and our profitability could suffer.
Under our business model, we do not manufacture many of the
component parts used in our hard drives, however, for some of
our product families, we do make most of our own heads. As a
result, the success of our products depends on our ability to
gain access to and integrate parts that are best in
class from reliable component suppliers. To do so, we must
effectively manage our relationships with our major component
suppliers. We must also effectively integrate different products
from a variety of suppliers, each of which employs variations on
technology, which can impact, for example, feasible combinations
of heads and media components. In August 2003, we settled
litigation with a supplier who previously was the sole source of
read channel devices for our hard drives. As a result of the
disputes that gave rise to the litigation, our profitability was
at risk until another suppliers read channel devices could
be designed into our products. Similar disputes with other
strategic component suppliers could adversely affect our
operating results.
Dependence
on a limited number of qualified suppliers of components and
manufacturing equipment could lead to delays, lost revenue or
increased costs.
Certain components are available from a limited number of
suppliers. Because we depend on a limited number of suppliers
for certain hard drive components and manufacturing equipment,
each of the following could significantly harm our operating
results:
|
|
|
|
|
an increase in the cost of such components or equipment;
|
|
|
|
an extended shortage of required components or equipment;
|
|
|
|
consolidation of key suppliers;
|
|
|
|
failure of a key suppliers business process; or
|
|
|
|
the failure of key suppliers to remain in business, adjust to
market conditions, or to meet our quality, yield or production
requirements.
|
Our future operating results may also depend substantially on
our suppliers ability to timely qualify their components
in our programs, and their ability to supply us with these
components in sufficient volumes to meet our production
requirements. A number of the components that we use are
available from only a single or limited number of qualified
outside suppliers, and may be used across multiple product
lines. In addition, some of the components (or component types)
used in our products are used in other devices, such as mobile
telephones and digital cameras. If there is a significant
simultaneous upswing in demand for such a component (or
component type) from several high volume industries, resulting
in a supply reduction, or a component is otherwise in short
supply, or if a supplier fails to qualify or has a quality issue
with a component, we may experience delays or increased costs in
obtaining that component. For example, the hard drive industry
is currently facing a tightness in the availability of media
(rotating magnetic disks) components, and there are currently
only three independent suppliers of aluminum media and three
independent suppliers of glass media in the market. Several of
our competitors have an internal supply of media therefore
allowing them to better withstand a shortage of media while, if
we are unable to obtain sufficient quantities of media, or other
necessary components, we may experience production delays which
could cause us loss of revenue. If a component becomes
unavailable, we could suffer significant loss of revenue.
In addition, certain equipment we use in our manufacturing or
testing processes is available only from a limited number of
suppliers. Some of this equipment uses materials that at times
could be in short supply. If these materials are not available,
or are not available in the quantities we require for our
manufacturing and testing processes, our ability to manufacture
our products could be impacted, and we could suffer significant
loss of revenue.
Contractual
commitments with component suppliers may result in us paying
increased charges and cash advances for such
components.
To reduce the risk of component shortages, we attempt to provide
significant lead times when buying these components. As a
result, we may be subject to cancellation charges if we cancel
orders, which may occur when we make technology transitions or
when our component needs change. In addition, we have entered
into contractual commitments with component suppliers, such as
suppliers of media, and may enter into contractual commitments
with other
17
component suppliers, in an effort to increase and stabilize the
supply of those components, and enable us to purchase such
components at favorable prices. Some of these commitments
require or may require us to buy a substantial number of
components from the supplier or make significant cash advances
to the supplier, however these commitments may not result in a
satisfactory increase or stabilization of the supply of such
components.
We have
high-volume hard drive manufacturing facilities in Malaysia and
Thailand, which subjects us to the risk of damage or loss of any
of these facilities and localized risks to personnel in these
locations.
Our hard drives are manufactured in facilities in Malaysia and
Thailand. A fire, flood, earthquake or other disaster, condition
or event such as a power outage that adversely affects any of
these facilities or our ability to manufacture could limit the
total volume of hard drives we are able to manufacture and
result in a loss of sales and revenue and harm our operating
results. Similarly, a localized health risk affecting our
personnel in Malaysia and Thailand, such as a new pandemic
influenza in Asia Pacific, could impair the total volume of hard
drives that we are able to manufacture.
Our head
manufacturing operations include a single wafer fabrication
facility in Fremont, California and a single head gimbal/head
stack assembly facility in Bang Pa-In, Thailand, which subjects
us to substantial risk of damage or loss if operations at either
of these facilities are disrupted.
As we have previously discussed in public statements, our
business plan presently contemplates that we plan to design and
manufacture approximately 70% of the heads required for the hard
drives we manufacture. We fabricate wafers in our Fremont,
California facility, and the wafers are then sent to our
Thailand facility for slider fabrication/wafer slicing, HGA
assembly and testing, and HSA assembly and testing. A fire,
flood, earthquake or other disaster, condition or event such as
a power outage that adversely affects our facilities in Fremont,
California or Bang Pa-In, Thailand would significantly affect
our supply of heads and limit our ability to manufacture hard
drives which would result in a substantial loss of sales and
revenue and a substantial harm to our operating results.
Our head
manufacturing operations may result in additional costs and
risks to our business.
Our vertical integration of head manufacturing resulted in a
fundamental change in our operating structure, as we now
manufacture heads for use in many of the hard drives we
manufacture. Consequently, we make more capital investments than
we would if we were not vertically integrated and carry a higher
percentage of fixed costs than assumed in our prior financial
business model. If the overall level of production decreases for
any reason, and we are unable to reduce our fixed costs to match
sales, our head manufacturing assets may face under-utilization
that may impact our results of operations. We are therefore
subject to additional risks related to overall asset
utilization, including the need to operate at high levels of
utilization to drive competitive costs, and the need for assured
supply of components, especially hard drive media, that is
optimized to work with our heads.
In addition, we may incur additional risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
insufficient head sources if we are unable to manufacture a
sufficient supply of heads to satisfy our needs;
|
|
|
|
third party head suppliers may not continue to do business with
us or may not do business with us on the same terms and
conditions we have previously enjoyed;
|
|
|
|
claims that our manufacturing of heads may infringe certain
intellectual property rights of other companies; and
|
|
|
|
difficulties locating suitable manufacturing equipment for our
head manufacturing processes and replacement parts for such
equipment.
|
If we do not adequately address the challenges related to our
head manufacturing operations, our ongoing operations could be
disrupted, resulting in a decrease in our revenue or profit
margins and negatively impacting our operating results.
18
Our
operating results may be adversely affected if we fail to
optimize the overall quality,
time-to-market
and
time-to-volume
of new and established products.
To achieve consistent success with our customers who manufacture
computers, systems and CE products, we must balance several key
attributes such as
time-to-market,
time-to-volume,
quality, cost, service, price and a broad product portfolio. If
we fail to:
|
|
|
|
|
maintain overall quality of products on new and established
programs;
|
|
|
|
produce sufficient quantities of products at the capacities our
customers demand while managing the integration of new and
established technologies;
|
|
|
|
develop and qualify new products that have changes in overall
specifications or features that our customers may require for
their business needs;
|
|
|
|
obtain commitments from our customers to qualify new products,
redesigns of current products, or new components in our existing
products;
|
|
|
|
qualify these products with key customers on a timely basis by
meeting all of our customers needs for performance,
quality and features;
|
|
|
|
maintain an adequate supply of components required to
manufacture our products;
|
|
|
|
maintain the manufacturing capability to quickly change our
product mix between different capacities, form factors and spin
speeds in response to changes in customers product
demands; or
|
|
|
|
consistently meet stated quality requirements on delivered
products, our operating results could be adversely affected.
|
If we are
unable to timely and cost-effectively develop heads with leading
technology and overall quality, our ability to sell our products
may be significantly diminished, which could materially and
adversely affect our business and financial results.
Under our business plan, we are developing and manufacturing a
substantial portion of the heads used in some of the product
families of hard drives we manufacture. Consequently, we are
more dependent upon our own development and execution efforts
and less able to take advantage of head technologies developed
by other head manufacturers. Technology transition for head
designs is critical to increasing our volume production of
heads. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be
successful in timely and cost-effectively developing and
manufacturing heads for products using future technologies. We
also may not effectively transition our head design and head
technology to achieve acceptable manufacturing yields using the
technologies necessary to satisfy our customers product
needs, or we may encounter quality problems with the heads we
manufacture. In addition, we may not have access to external
sources of supply without incurring substantial costs. For
example, we recently began using perpendicular recording heads
in certain of our products. We face various challenges in
ramping the manufacturing volume of these products and if we do
not adequately address these challenges, or if we encounter
quality problems with the heads we manufacture for these
products, our continued shipment of these products may be
delayed, impairing our ability to realize revenue from these
products.
If we
fail to qualify our products with our customers, they may not
purchase any units of a particular product line, which would
have a significant adverse impact on our sales.
We regularly engage in new product qualification with our
customers. To be considered for qualification, we must be among
the leaders in
time-to-market
with our new products. Once a product is accepted for
qualification testing, failures or delays in the qualification
process can result in our losing sales to that customer until
the next generation of products is introduced. The effect of
missing a product qualification opportunity is magnified by the
limited number of high volume OEMs, which continue to
consolidate their share of the desktop, mobile and CE markets.
If product life cycles continue to be extended due to a decrease
in the rate of areal density growth, we may have a significantly
longer period to wait before we have an opportunity to qualify a
new product with a customer, which could harm our competitive
position. These risks are increased because we expect cost
improvements and competitive pressures to result in declining
gross margins on our current generation products.
19
We are
subject to risks related to product defects, which could result
in product recalls and could subject us to warranty claims in
excess of our warranty provisions or which are greater than
anticipated due to the unenforceability of liability
limitations.
We warrant our products for up to five years. We test our hard
drives in our manufacturing facilities through a variety of
means. However, there can be no assurance that our testing will
reveal latent defects in our products, which may not become
apparent until after the products have been sold into the
market. Accordingly, there is a risk that product defects will
occur, which could require a product recall. Product recalls can
be expensive to implement and, if a product recall occurs during
the products warranty period, we may be required to
replace the defective product. In addition, a product recall may
damage our relationship with our customers, and we may lose
market share with our customers, including our OEM customers.
Our standard warranties contain limits on damages and exclusions
of liability for consequential damages and for misuse, improper
installation, alteration, accident or mishandling while in the
possession of someone other than us. We record an accrual for
estimated warranty costs at the time revenue is recognized. We
may incur additional operating expenses if our warranty
provision does not reflect the actual cost of resolving issues
related to defects in our products. If these additional expenses
are significant, it could adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
Current
or future competitors may gain a technology advantage or develop
an advantageous cost structure that we cannot match.
It may be possible for our current or future competitors to gain
an advantage in product technology, manufacturing technology, or
process technology, which may allow them to offer products or
services that have a significant advantage over the products and
services that we offer. Advantages could be in capacity,
performance, reliability, serviceability, or other attributes.
Higher capacity storage needs have typically been better served
by magnetic hard drives than flash memory as hard drive
manufacturers can offer better value at high capacities, while
lower capacity needs have been successfully served by solid
state storage such as flash memory technology. Advances in
magnetic, optical, semiconductor or other data storage
technologies could result in competitive products that have
better performance or lower cost per unit of capacity than our
products. If we fail to be cost competitive against flash
memory, we could be at a competitive disadvantage to competitors
using semiconductor technology. For example, flash memory
recently achieved improvements in their cost structure and we
believe reduced their pricing, thus more effectively competing
with our
1.0-inch
hard drive product. If we are unable to lower the cost structure
of future generations of
sub-2.5-inch
form factor hard drive products through technology advances such
as increased storage capacity, this product category could be at
a competitive disadvantage to flash technology.
Further
industry consolidation could provide competitive advantages to
our competitors.
The hard drive industry has experienced consolidation over the
past several years, including the recent acquisition of Maxtor
Corporation by Seagate Technology. Consolidation by our
competitors may enhance their capacity, abilities and resources
and lower their cost structure, causing us to be at a
competitive disadvantage. Additionally, continued industry
consolidation may lead to uncertainty in areas such as component
availability, which could negatively impact our cost structure.
Sales in
the distribution channel are important to our business, and if
we fail to maintain brand preference with our distributors or if
distribution markets for hard drives weaken, our operating
results could suffer.
Our distribution customers typically sell to small computer
manufacturers, dealers, systems integrators and other resellers.
We face significant competition in this channel as a result of
limited product qualification programs and a significant focus
on price and availability of product. If we fail to remain
competitive in terms of our technology, quality, service and
support, our distribution customers may favor our competitors,
and our operating results could suffer. We also face significant
risk in the distribution market for hard drives. If the
distribution market weakens as a result of a slowing PC growth
rate, technology transitions or a significant change in consumer
buying preference from white box to branded PCs, or we
experience significant price declines due to oversupply in the
distribution channel, then our operating results would be
adversely affected.
20
The hard
drive industry is highly competitive and can be characterized by
significant shifts in market share among the major
competitors.
The price of hard drives has fallen over time due to increases
in supply, cost reductions, technological advances and price
reductions by competitors seeking to liquidate excess
inventories or attempting to gain market share. In addition,
rapid technological changes often reduce the volume and
profitability of sales of existing products and increase the
risk of inventory obsolescence. We also face competition from
other companies that produce alternative storage technologies
like flash memory. These factors, taken together, may result in
significant shifts in market share among the industrys
major participants. In addition, product recalls can lead to a
loss of market share, which could adversely affect our operating
results.
Some of
our competitors with diversified business units outside the hard
drive industry may be able to sell disk drives at lower margins
that we cannot match.
Some of our competitors earn a significant portion of their
revenue from business units outside the hard drive industry.
Because they do not depend solely on sales of hard drives to
achieve profitability, they may be able to sell hard drives at
lower margins and operate their hard drive business unit at a
loss while still remaining profitable overall. In addition, if
these competitors can increase sales of non-hard drive products
to the same customers, they may benefit from selling their hard
drives at low margins. Our results of operations may be
adversely affected if we can not successfully compete with these
companies.
If we do
not successfully expand into new hard drive markets, our
business may suffer.
To remain a significant supplier of hard drives, we will need to
offer a broad range of hard drive products to our customers. We
currently offer a variety of
3.5-inch
hard drives for the desktop, enterprise, CE and external storage
markets, and we also offer
2.5-inch
form factor hard drives for the mobile, CE and external storage
markets. However, demand for hard drives may shift to products
in smaller other form factors, which our competitors may already
offer. We recently entered into the
sub-2.5-inch
hard drive market with a
1.0-inch
hard drive product, however the demand for the
1.0-inch
form factor drive is significantly less than our initial
estimates of this market, thus impairing our ability to realize
revenue from this product.
In addition, the desktop and enterprise markets are
transitioning from parallel interfaces, such as PATA and SCSI,
to serial interfaces, such as SATA and SAS, to handle higher
data transfer rates. We currently offer SATA products; however,
the transition of technology and the introduction of new
products are challenging and create risks. For example,
acceptance of the SATA interface may not continue to grow, or
customers may choose to purchase alternative interfaces that may
not be compatible with future generations of SATA hard drives.
Moreover, our customers may require new SATA features that we
may not be able to deliver in a timely and cost effective manner.
While we continue to develop new products and look to expand
into other hard drive markets, the success of our new product
introductions is dependent on a number of factors, including
difficulties faced in manufacturing ramp, market acceptance,
effective management of inventory levels in line with
anticipated product demand, and the risk that our new products
may have quality problems or other defects in the early stages
of introduction that were not anticipated in the design of those
products. Further, we need to identify how any of the hard drive
markets that we are expanding into may have different
characteristics from the desktop market, such as, demand volume
growth rates, demand seasonality, product generations
development rates, customer concentrations, and cost and
performance requirements, and we must properly address these
differences. If we fail to successfully develop and manufacture
new products and expand into new hard drive markets, customers
may decrease the amount of our products that they purchase, and
we may lose business to our competitors who offer these products.
Expanding
into new hard drive markets exposes our business to different
seasonal demand cycles, which in turn could adversely affect our
operating results.
The CE markets that we are attempting to expand into have
different seasonal pricing and volume demand cycles as compared
to the PC market. By expanding into these markets, we become
exposed to seasonal fluctuations that are different than, and in
addition to, those of the PC market. For example, because the
primary customer for products such as consumer handheld devices
and game consoles are individual consumers, these markets
experience a dramatic increase in
21
demand during the winter holiday season. If we do not properly
adjust our supply to new demand cycles such as this, we risk
having excess inventory during periods of low demand and
insufficient inventory during periods of high demand, therefore
harming our operating results.
If we do
not successfully continue to expand into the mobile market, our
business may suffer.
We began shipping
2.5-inch
form factor hard drives for the mobile market during calendar
year 2004. Although many of our customers who purchase
3.5-inch
form factor hard drives also purchase the
2.5-inch
form factor drives, the markets are characterized by some
different competitors and different overall requirements. If we
are unable to adapt to these differences and meet the new
requirements, we would have a competitive disadvantage to
companies that are successful in this regard, and our business
and financial results could suffer. In addition, if we continue
to incur significant costs in manufacturing and selling the
2.5-inch
hard drives, and if we are unable to recover those costs from
sales of the products, then we may not be able to compete
successfully in this market and our operating results may suffer.
Selling
to the retail market is an important part of our business, and
if we fail to maintain and grow our market share or gain market
acceptance of our branded products, our operating results could
suffer.
We sell our branded products directly to a select group of major
retailers, for example, computer superstores and CE stores,
and authorize sales through distributors to other retailers and
online resellers. Our current retail customer base is primarily
in the United States, Canada and Europe. We are facing increased
competition from other companies for shelf space at major
retailers, which could result in lower revenues. If we fail to
successfully maintain a customer preference for Western Digital
brand products or fail to successfully expand into multiple
channels, our operating results may be adversely affected. In
certain markets, we are trying to grow market share, and in the
process may face strong competition, which could result in lower
gross margins. We will continue to introduce new products in the
retail market that incorporate our disk drives. There can be no
assurance that these products gain market acceptance, and if
they do not, our operating results could suffer.
Loss of
market share with or by a key customer could harm our operating
results.
A majority of our revenue comes from about a dozen customers.
For example, during 2006, one customer, Dell, accounted for more
than 12% of our revenue, and sales to our top 10 customers,
including Dell, accounted for 47% of revenue. These customers
have a variety of suppliers to choose from and therefore can
make substantial demands on us, including demands on product
pricing and on contractual terms, which often results in the
allocation of risk to us as the supplier. Even if we
successfully qualify a product with a customer, the customer
generally is not obligated to purchase any minimum volume of
products from us and may be able to cancel an order or terminate
its relationship with us at any time. Our ability to maintain
strong relationships with our principal customers is essential
to our future performance. If we lose a key customer, if any of
our key customers reduce their orders of our products or require
us to reduce our prices before we are able to reduce costs, if a
customer is acquired by one of our competitors or if a key
customer suffers financial hardship then our operating results
would likely be harmed. In addition, if customer pressures
require us to reduce our pricing such that our gross margins are
diminished, we could decide not to sell our products to a
particular customer, which could result in a decrease in our
revenue.
We may be
unable to retain our key personnel and skilled
employees.
Our success depends upon the continued contributions of our key
personnel and skilled employees, many of whom would be extremely
difficult to replace. Worldwide competition for skilled
employees in the hard drive industry is intense. Volatility or
lack of positive performance in our stock price may adversely
affect our ability to retain key personnel or skilled employees
who have received equity compensation. If we are unable to
retain our existing key personnel or skilled employees, or hire
and integrate new key personnel or skilled employees, or if we
fail to implement a succession plan to prepare qualified
individuals to join us upon the departure of a member of our key
personnel, our operating results would likely be harmed.
22
Manufacturing
and marketing our products abroad subjects us to numerous
risks.
We are subject to risks associated with our foreign
manufacturing operations and foreign marketing efforts,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
obtaining requisite United States of America and foreign
governmental permits and approvals;
|
|
|
|
currency exchange rate fluctuations or restrictions;
|
|
|
|
political instability and civil unrest;
|
|
|
|
limited transportation availability, delays, and extended time
required for shipping, which risks may be compounded in periods
of price declines;
|
|
|
|
higher freight rates;
|
|
|
|
labor problems;
|
|
|
|
trade restrictions or higher tariffs;
|
|
|
|
exchange, currency and tax controls and reallocations;
|
|
|
|
increasing labor and overhead costs; and
|
|
|
|
loss or non-renewal of favorable tax treatment under agreements
or treaties with foreign tax authorities.
|
Terrorist
attacks may adversely affect our business and operating
results.
The continued threat of terrorist activity and other acts of war
or hostility have created uncertainty in the financial and
insurance markets and have significantly increased the
political, economic and social instability in some of the
geographic areas in which we operate. Acts of terrorism, either
domestically or abroad, could create further uncertainties and
instability. To the extent this results in disruption or delays
of our manufacturing capabilities or shipments of our products,
our business, operating results and financial condition could be
adversely affected.
We face
litigation risks relating to our historical stock option grants
that could have a material adverse effect on the operation of
our business.
Several purported derivative actions were filed nominally on our
behalf against certain of our current and former directors and
officers in connection with our historical stock option granting
practices. See Part I, Item 3, Legal
Proceedings for a more detailed description of these
proceedings. We are and may in the future be subject to other
litigation or government investigations arising in connection
with such option practices. These proceedings may be
time-consuming, expensive and disruptive to normal business
operations, and the outcome of any such proceeding is difficult
to predict. The defense of such lawsuits or investigations could
result in significant expense and the diversion of our
managements time and attention from the operation of our
business, which could impede our ability to achieve our business
objectives. Some or all of the amount we may be required to pay
to defend or to satisfy a judgment or settlement of any or all
of these proceedings may not be covered by insurance.
Under indemnification agreements we have entered into with our
current and former officers and directors, we are required to
indemnify them, and advance expenses to them, in connection with
their participation in proceedings arising out of their service
to us. These payments may be material.
The
nature of our business and our reliance on intellectual property
and other proprietary information subjects us to the risk of
significant litigation.
The hard drive industry has been characterized by significant
litigation. This includes litigation relating to patent and
other intellectual property rights, product liability claims and
other types of litigation. Litigation can be expensive, lengthy
and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the
results of litigation are inherently uncertain and may result in
adverse rulings or decisions. We may enter into settlements or
be subject to judgments that may, individually or in the
aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition or results of operations.
23
We evaluate notices of alleged patent infringement and notices
of patents from patent holders that we receive from time to
time. If claims or actions are asserted against us, we may be
required to obtain a license or cross-license, modify our
existing technology or design a new non-infringing technology.
Such licenses or design modifications can be extremely costly.
In addition, we may decide to settle a claim or action against
us, which settlement could be costly. We may also be liable for
any past infringement. If there is an adverse ruling against us
in an infringement lawsuit, an injunction could be issued
barring production or sale of any infringing product. It could
also result in a damage award equal to a reasonable royalty or
lost profits or, if there is a finding of willful infringement,
treble damages. Any of these results would likely increase our
costs and harm our operating results.
Our
reliance on intellectual property and other proprietary
information subjects us to the risk that these key ingredients
of our business could be copied by competitors.
Our success depends, in significant part, on the proprietary
nature of our technology, including non-patentable intellectual
property such as our process technology. Despite safeguards, to
the extent that a competitor is able to reproduce or otherwise
capitalize on our technology, it may be difficult, expensive or
impossible for us to obtain necessary legal protection. Also,
the laws of some foreign countries may not protect our
intellectual property to the same extent as do the laws of the
United States. In addition to patent protection of intellectual
property rights, we consider elements of our product designs and
processes to be proprietary and confidential. We rely upon
employee, consultant and vendor non-disclosure agreements and
contractual provisions and a system of internal safeguards to
protect our proprietary information. However, any of our
registered or unregistered intellectual property rights may be
challenged or exploited by others in the industry, which might
harm our operating results.
Environmental
regulation costs could harm our operating results.
We may be subject to various state, federal and international
laws and regulations governing the environment, including those
restricting the presence of certain substances in electronic
products and making producers of those products financially
responsible for the collection, treatment, recycling and
disposal of certain products. Such laws and regulations have
been passed in several jurisdictions in which we operate,
including various European Union member countries. For example,
the European Union has enacted the Restriction of the Use of
Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (RoHS) and the Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE) directives. RoHS prohibits the use of certain
substances, including lead, in certain products, including hard
drives, put on the market after July 1, 2006. The WEEE
directive obligates parties that place electrical and electronic
equipment onto the market in the EU to put a clearly
identifiable mark on the equipment, register with and report to
EU member countries regarding distribution of the equipment, and
provide a mechanism to take-back and properly dispose of the
equipment. Each EU member country has enacted, or is expected to
soon enact, legislation clarifying what is and what is not
covered by the WEEE directive in that country. However, there is
still some uncertainty in certain EU countries as to which party
involved in the manufacture, distribution and sale of electronic
equipment will be ultimately responsible for registration,
reporting and disposal. Similar legislation may be enacted in
other locations where we manufacture or sell our products, such
as Asia. We will need to ensure that we comply with such laws
and regulations as they are enacted, and that our component
suppliers also timely comply with such laws and regulations. If
we fail to timely comply with the legislation, our customers may
refuse to purchase our products, which would have a materially
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
In connection with our compliance with such environmental laws
and regulations, we could incur substantial costs and be subject
to disruptions to our operations and logistics. In addition, if
we were found to be in violation of these laws, we could be
subject to governmental fines and liability to our customers. If
we have to make significant capital expenditures to comply with
environmental laws, or if we are subject to significant expenses
in connection with a violation of these laws, our financial
condition or operating results could suffer.
Fluctuations
in currency exchange rates as a result of our international
operations may negatively affect our operating
results.
Because we manufacture our products abroad, our operating costs
are subject to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.
Further fluctuations in the exchange rate of the Thai Baht and
of the Malaysian Ringgit may negatively impact our operating
results.
24
The Thai Baht is a free floating currency while the Malaysian
Ringgit exchange rate policy recently defined by the Malaysian
government is one of a managed float. We have attempted to
manage the impact of foreign currency exchange rate changes by,
among other things, entering into short-term, forward contracts.
However, these contracts do not cover our full exposure and can
be canceled by the issuer if currency controls are put in place.
Currently, we hedge the Thai Baht, Euro and British Pound
Sterling with forward contracts.
If the U.S. dollar exhibits sustained weakness against most
foreign currencies, the U.S. dollar equivalents of unhedged
manufacturing costs could increase because a significant portion
of our production costs are foreign-currency denominated.
Conversely, there would not be an offsetting impact to revenues
since revenues are substantially U.S. dollar denominated.
Increases
in our customers credit risk could result in credit losses
and an increase in our operating costs.
Some of our OEM customers have adopted a subcontractor model
that requires us to contract directly with companies that
provide manufacturing services to our OEM customers. Because
these subcontractors are generally not as well capitalized as
our direct OEM customers, this subcontractor model exposes us to
increased credit risks. Our agreements with our OEM customers
may not permit us to increase our product prices to alleviate
this increased credit risk. Additionally, as we attempt to
expand our OEM and distribution channel sales into emerging
economies such as Brazil, Russia, India and China, the customers
in these regions may have a relatively short operating history,
making it more difficult for us to accurately access the
associated credit risks. Any credit losses we may suffer as a
result of these increased risks, or as a result of credit losses
from any significant customer, would increase our operating
costs, which may negatively impact our operating results.
Inaccurate
projections of demand for our product can cause large
fluctuations in our quarterly results.
We often ship a high percentage of our total quarterly sales in
the third month of the quarter, which makes it difficult for us
to forecast our financial results before the end of the quarter.
In addition, our quarterly projections and results may be
subject to significant fluctuations as a result of a number of
other factors including:
|
|
|
|
|
the timing of orders from and shipment of products to major
customers;
|
|
|
|
our product mix;
|
|
|
|
changes in the prices of our products;
|
|
|
|
manufacturing delays or interruptions;
|
|
|
|
acceptance by customers of competing products in lieu of our
products;
|
|
|
|
variations in the cost of components for our products;
|
|
|
|
limited availability of components that we obtain from a single
or a limited number of suppliers;
|
|
|
|
competition and consolidation in the data storage industry;
|
|
|
|
seasonal and other fluctuations in demand for PCs often due to
technological advances; and
|
|
|
|
availability and rates of transportation.
|
Rapidly
changing conditions in the hard drive industry make it difficult
to predict actual results.
We have made and continue to make a number of estimates and
assumptions relating to our consolidated financial reporting.
The highly technical nature of our products and the rapidly
changing market conditions with which we deal means that actual
results may differ significantly from our estimates and
assumptions. These changes have impacted our financial results
in the past and may continue to do so in the future. Key
estimates and assumptions for us include:
|
|
|
|
|
accruals for warranty costs related to product defects;
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
price protection adjustments and other sales promotions and
allowances on products sold to retailers, resellers and
distributors;
|
|
|
|
inventory adjustments for write-down of inventories to lower of
cost or market value (net realizable value);
|
|
|
|
reserves for doubtful accounts;
|
|
|
|
accruals for product returns;
|
|
|
|
accruals for litigation and other contingencies; and
|
|
|
|
reserves for deferred tax assets.
|
The
market price of our common stock is volatile.
The market price of our common stock has been, and may continue
to be, extremely volatile. Factors such as the following may
significantly affect the market price of our common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
actual or anticipated fluctuations in our operating results;
|
|
|
|
announcements of technological innovations by us or our
competitors which may decrease the volume and profitability of
sales of our existing products and increase the risk of
inventory obsolescence;
|
|
|
|
new products introduced by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
periods of severe pricing pressures due to oversupply or price
erosion resulting from competitive pressures or industry
consolidation;
|
|
|
|
developments with respect to patents or proprietary rights;
|
|
|
|
conditions and trends in the hard drive, computer, data and
content management, storage and communication
industries; and
|
|
|
|
changes in financial estimates by securities analysts relating
specifically to us or the hard drive industry in general.
|
In addition, general economic conditions may cause the stock
market to experience extreme price and volume fluctuations from
time to time that particularly affect the stock prices of many
high technology companies. These fluctuations often appear to be
unrelated to the operating performance of the companies.
Securities class action lawsuits are often brought against
companies after periods of volatility in the market price of
their securities. A number of such suits have been filed against
us in the past, and should any new lawsuits be filed, such
matters could result in substantial costs and a diversion of
resources and managements attention.
We may be
unable to raise future capital through debt or equity
financing.
Due to the risks described herein, in the future we may be
unable to maintain adequate financial resources for capital
expenditures, expansion or acquisition activity, working capital
and research and development. We have a credit facility which
matures on September 20, 2009. If we decide to increase or
accelerate our capital expenditures or research and development
efforts, or if results of operations do not meet our
expectations, we could require additional debt or equity
financing. However, we cannot ensure that additional financing
will be available to us or available on acceptable terms. An
equity financing could also be dilutive to our existing
stockholders.
If our
internal controls are found to be ineffective, our financial
results or our stock price may be adversely affected.
Our evaluation resulted in our conclusion that as of
June 30, 2006, in compliance with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, our internal controls over financial
reporting were effective. We believe that we currently have
26
adequate internal control procedures in place for future
periods; however, if our internal controls are found to be
ineffective, our financial results or our stock price may be
adversely affected.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
Not applicable.
Our corporate headquarters are located in Lake Forest,
California. The Lake Forest facilities consist of approximately
257,000 square feet of leased space and house our
management, research and development, administrative and sales
personnel. In addition, in Fremont, California, we own
facilities consisting of approximately 189,000 square feet,
and we lease facilities consisting of approximately
97,000 square feet, that we use for head wafer fabrication,
research and development and warehousing. We also lease
approximately 213,000 square feet in San Jose,
California, primarily for research and development activities.
In addition, we lease one facility in Irvine, California, which
consists of approximately 60,000 square feet that we use as
a hard drive return and refurbishing center. We also lease
office space in various other locations throughout the world
primarily for sales and technical support.
We own a manufacturing facility in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia of
approximately 484,000 square feet, which is used for
assembly of hard drives, printed circuit boards and HSAs. We
also own a manufacturing facility in Navanakorn, Thailand,
consisting of approximately 226,000 square feet, which is
used for assembly of hard drives. In addition, we own a facility
in Bang Pa-In, Thailand, consisting of four buildings with
approximately 902,000 square feet, which is used for slider
fabrication, the assembly of hard drives, HGAs and HSAs, and
research and development.
We believe our present facilities are adequate for our current
needs, although the process of upgrading our facilities to meet
technological and market requirements is expected to continue.
New manufacturing facilities, in general, can be developed and
become operational within approximately nine to eighteen months
should we require such additional facilities.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
In the normal course of business, we are subject to legal
proceedings, lawsuits and other claims. We believe that any
monetary liability or financial impact to us from these matters
or the specified matters below, individually and in the
aggregate, beyond what we have provided for at June 30,
2006, would not be material to our financial condition. However,
the ultimate amount of monetary liability or financial impact
with respect to these matters is very uncertain and difficult to
predict, and could therefore differ materially from our
expectations.
The following purported shareholder derivative actions have been
filed challenging conduct by certain of our current and former
board members and officers in connection with various stock
option grants:
|
|
|
|
|
Dreyfuss v. Massengill, et al., Case No. SACV
06-729 AG (RNGx), United States District Court for the
Central District of California, filed August 9, 2006 and
Kastella and Sakamoto v. Mercer, et al., Case
No. SACV 06-868 CJC (MLGx), United States District
Court for the Central District of California, filed
September 14, 2006. The plaintiffs in the Dreyfuss
and Kastella and Sakamoto actions jointly filed an
amended complaint on September 29, 2006 asserting claims
for violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act, accounting, breach of fiduciary duty
and/or
aiding and abetting, constructive fraud, waste of corporate
assets, unjust enrichment, rescission, breach of contract, and
violation of the California Corporations Code in connection with
our option granting practices. We have been advised by
plaintiffs counsel that the parties intend to consolidate
the Dreyfuss action with the Kastella and Sakamoto
action.
|
|
|
|
Mason v. Massengill, et al, Case
No. CV06-6845
PA (RZx), United States District Court for the Central
District of California, filed October 27, 2006. The
complaint asserts claims for violations of Section 14(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act, accounting, breach of fiduciary
duty and/or
aiding and abetting, abuse of control, gross mismanagement,
constructive fraud, waste of corporate assets, unjust
enrichment, rescission, and violation of the California
Corporations Code in connection with our option granting
practices.
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
Lasker v. Massengill, et al., Case
No. 06-CC-00159,
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Orange, filed August 14, 2006. The complaint asserts causes
of action for breach of fiduciary duty, accounting, abuse of
control, gross mismanagement, constructive fraud, corporate
waste, unjust enrichment, and rescission in connection with our
option granting practices.
|
|
|
|
Rosen v. Shakeel, et al., Case
No. 06CC00234, Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Orange, filed November 6,
2006. The complaint asserts causes of action for unjust
enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, violations of the
California Corporations Code, abuse of control, gross
mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, accounting,
rescission, and constructive trust in connection with our option
granting practices.
|
We have joined the other defendants in filing a motion to
dismiss the Dreyfuss and Kastella and Sakamoto
actions.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during
the fourth quarter of 2006.
28
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder
Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities.
|
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc.
(NYSE) under the symbol WDC. The
approximate number of holders of record of our common stock as
of November 15, 2006 was 2,401.
We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and do
not intend to pay any cash dividends on common stock in the
foreseeable future. Our $125 million credit facility
prohibits us from paying cash dividends on our common stock.
The high and low sales prices of our common stock, as reported
by the NYSE, for each quarter of 2006 and 2005 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
$
|
15.08
|
|
|
$
|
18.93
|
|
|
$
|
24.18
|
|
|
$
|
21.79
|
|
Low
|
|
|
12.29
|
|
|
|
11.35
|
|
|
|
18.67
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
$
|
9.13
|
|
|
$
|
11.00
|
|
|
$
|
13.12
|
|
|
$
|
16.10
|
|
Low
|
|
|
6.39
|
|
|
|
7.95
|
|
|
|
9.84
|
|
|
|
11.64
|
|
The following table provides information about repurchases by us
of our common stock during the quarter ended June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of
|
|
|
Maximum Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased as
|
|
|
Shares that May Yet
|
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of Publicly
|
|
|
be Purchased
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Average Price
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
Under the
|
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
Paid per Share(1)
|
|
|
Program
|
|
|
Program(2)
|
|
|
April 1, 2006
April 28, 2006
|
|
|
5,895
|
(3)
|
|
$
|
19.3700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
145,740,573
|
|
April 29, 2006
May 26, 2006
|
|
|
216,363
|
(4)
|
|
$
|
19.0838
|
|
|
|
202,500
|
|
|
$
|
141,898,252
|
|
May 27, 2006
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
314,400
|
|
|
$
|
19.0074
|
|
|
|
314,400
|
|
|
$
|
135,922,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
536,658
|
|
|
$
|
19.0422
|
|
|
|
516,900
|
|
|
$
|
135,922,313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Average price paid per share excludes commission. |
|
(2) |
|
Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase
$250 million of our common stock in open market
transactions. The term of the program is a five-year period from
November 17, 2005 to November 17, 2010. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents shares delivered by employees to us to satisfy
tax-withholding obligations upon the vesting of restricted stock. |
|
(4) |
|
Represents 202,500 shares purchased in open-market
transactions and 13,863 shares delivered by employees to us
to satisfy tax-withholding obligations upon the vesting of
restricted stock. |
29
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
Financial
Highlights
This selected consolidated financial data should be read
together with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related
Notes contained in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
and in the subsequent reports filed with the SEC, as well as the
section of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and the other reports entitled Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
We have adjusted our consolidated financial statements for the
years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, as well as
the selected financial data for the years ended June 27,
2003 and June 28, 2002, to record additional non-cash
stock-based compensation expense, and related tax accruals,
resulting from stock options granted during fiscal years 1998 to
2003 that were incorrectly accounted for under
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. For
additional information on the adjustments, see
Item 7 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations below
and Part II, Item 8 Note 2 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
June 27,
|
|
|
June 28,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except per share and employee data)
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
4,341
|
|
|
$
|
3,639
|
|
|
$
|
3,047
|
|
|
$
|
2,719
|
|
|
$
|
2,151
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
$
|
829
|
|
|
$
|
590
|
|
|
$
|
461
|
|
|
$
|
443
|
|
|
$
|
281
|
|
Income from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
395
|
|
|
$
|
196
|
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
179
|
|
|
$
|
49
|
|
Income from continuing operations
per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
.94
|
|
|
$
|
.73
|
|
|
$
|
.91
|
|
|
$
|
.26
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
.90
|
|
|
$
|
.69
|
|
|
$
|
.87
|
|
|
$
|
.26
|
|
Working capital
|
|
$
|
633
|
|
|
$
|
361
|
|
|
$
|
270
|
|
|
$
|
238
|
|
|
$
|
37
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
2,073
|
|
|
$
|
1,589
|
|
|
$
|
1,159
|
|
|
$
|
866
|
|
|
$
|
637
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
1,157
|
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
|
$
|
487
|
|
|
$
|
327
|
|
|
$
|
103
|
(1)
|
Number of employees
|
|
|
24,750
|
|
|
|
23,161
|
|
|
|
17,376
|
|
|
|
11,508
|
|
|
|
9,550
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Reflects the cumulative effect of additional non-cash
stock-based compensation expense for fiscal years 1998 to 2002
resulting in a $12.7 million increase to accumulated
deficit and a corresponding adjustment to additional paid-in
capital. |
For additional information on the quarterly impact of the
aforementioned adjustments on fiscal 2006 and 2005, see
Part II, Item 8 Note 12 of the Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements.
No cash dividends were paid for the years presented.
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
Forward-Looking
Statements
The following discussion and analysis contains
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal
securities laws. You are urged to carefully review our
description and examples of forward-looking statements included
earlier in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
immediately prior to Part I, under the heading
Forward Looking Statements. Forward-looking
statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could
cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed
in the forward-looking statements. You are urged to carefully
review the disclosures we make concerning risks and other
factors that may affect our business and operating results,
including those made in Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
as well as our other reports filed with the SEC. You are
cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We
do not
30
intend, and undertake no obligation, to publish revised
forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances
after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of
unanticipated events.
Adjustment
to Previously Issued Financial Statements
We are filing this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended June 30, 2006 with adjustments to our
consolidated financial statements for the years ended
July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004 and the related
disclosures. This
Form 10-K
also includes adjustments to selected financial data as of and
for the years ended June 27, 2003 and June 28, 2002,
which is included in Item 6.
We have adjusted our consolidated financial statements for the
years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, as well as
the selected financial data for the years ended June 27,
2003 and June 28, 2002, to record additional non-cash
stock-based compensation expense, and related tax accruals,
resulting from stock options granted during fiscal years 1998 to
2003 that were incorrectly accounted for under
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP). Our decision to adjust our financial
statements was based on the facts obtained from an independent
investigation into our stock option accounting that was
conducted under the direction of a special committee
(Special Committee) of our Board of Directors. The
Board created the Special Committee, which was composed solely
of independent directors, to conduct a voluntary,
company-initiated review of matters related to past stock option
grants, including the timing of such grants and associated
documentation.
The Special Committee reviewed all option grants of the Company
during the period from July 1, 1997 through June 30,
2006 (the Review Period). The Special Committee
reviewed corporate records and electronic documentation and
interviewed current and former employees and directors. The
Special Committee presented its investigative findings and
recommendations to the Board of Directors and our independent
auditors, KPMG LLP.
At the completion of its investigation, the Special Committee
identified, and our management concurred, that the appropriate
measurement date for 28 option grants made on 27 separate grant
dates during the period from fiscal 1998 through fiscal 2004
differed from the originally stated grant dates for such awards.
Because the prices at the originally stated grant dates were, in
19 of such instances, lower than the prices on the appropriate
measurement dates for such grants, our management determined we
should have recognized stock-based compensation expense and
additional tax expense in our historical financial statements
for these 19 grants. For the remaining 9 grants, since the
prices at the originally stated grant dates were at or above the
prices on the appropriate measurement dates for such grants, we
determined that no accounting adjustment should be made for
these grants.
Key findings from the Special Committees investigation
include:
|
|
|
|
|
Found no evidence that anyone manipulated the grant
documentation or grant dates in order to avoid compensation
expense or other financial statement impacts.
|
|
|
|
Found no misconduct by any member of our current management team.
|
|
|
|
For 19 grants made during the period from fiscal 1998 through
fiscal 2003, our stock price at the appropriate measurement date
was higher than the price on the originally stated grant dates.
As a result, we should have recognized stock-based compensation
expense and additional tax expense in our historical financial
statements for these 19 grants. Based on these findings, we have
determined we should have recognized approximately
$21 million of stock-based compensation and tax-related
expenses.
|
|
|
|
Approximately $13.2 million, before tax-related expenses,
of these additional expenses were attributable to annual
employee stock option grants made by the Compensation Committee
in November 1998 and 1999 and a special employee grant made in
March 2000 for which there was inadequate or no support for
selection of the grant dates, and the grant dates were at a low
price in the relevant period. These grants were made by
unanimous written consent of the Compensation Committee of our
Board.
|
|
|
|
The Special Committee concluded that the annual employee stock
option grant made in November 1999 was intentionally dated with
hindsight at a low price. While improper, no evidence was found
that this action was taken to avoid compensation expense or
other financial statement impacts.
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
Approximately $4.2 million, before tax-related expenses, of
these additional expenses were attributable to annual employee
stock option grants made in September 2001 and 2002. For these
grants, acting at a meeting, the Compensation Committee approved
specific grants for Section 16(b) Officers and an overall
budgeted number of shares for grants to employees that were not
Section 16(b) Officers to be allocated by later management
action. The allocation of awards to employees that were not
Section 16(b) Officers was not completed with finality by
the grant date.
|
|
|
|
Approximately $1.0 million, before tax-related expenses,
additional expenses were attributable to grants involving a
variety of administrative errors, including errors in
administration of grants to new hires and in connection with
promotions, and errors in supporting documentation.
|
We determined that the cumulative pre-tax non-cash stock-based
compensation expense resulting from revised measurement dates
was approximately $18.4 million for fiscal years 1998 to
2006. This additional compensation expense relates to stock
options covering approximately 12.6 million shares.
Additionally, we have recorded $2.5 million in tax-related
expenses resulting from the recharacterization of incentive
stock options to non-qualified stock options for fiscal years
1998 to 2006. The following table summarizes the impact of the
related adjustments (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
Fiscal Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
1998 to 2003
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
15.4
|
|
|
$
|
18.4
|
|
Tax-related expenses
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.4
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
$
|
15.7
|
|
|
$
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table reflects the consolidated income statement
classification of the additional stock-based compensation and
tax-related expenses related to the adjustment for fiscal years
1998 to 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
Research and development expense
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative expense
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The adjustments reduce previously reported diluted earnings per
share (diluted EPS) by $0.01 each for both of the
years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004. Given that
we have concluded that the foregoing adjustments were not
material to our historical consolidated financial statements, we
have not amended, and do not intend to amend, any of our
previously filed annual reports on
Form 10-K
or quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
for the periods affected by the adjustments. For additional
information on the adjustments, see Part II,
Item 8 Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Our
Company
We design, develop, manufacture and sell hard drives. A hard
drive is a device that uses one or more rotating magnetic disks
and allows fast access to data. Hard drives are key components
of computers, data storage subsystems and many consumer
electronics (CE) devices.
We sell our products worldwide to original equipment
manufacturers (OEM) for use in computer systems,
subsystems or CE devices, and to distributors, resellers and
retailers. Our hard drives are used in desktop computers,
notebook computers, and enterprise applications such as servers,
workstations, network attached storage and storage area
networks. Additionally, our hard drives are used in CE
applications such as digital video recorders (DVR),
satellite and cable set-top boxes (STB), MP3
players, and universal serial bus (USB) thumb
drives. We also sell our hard drives as stand-alone storage
products and integrate them into our own WD-branded external
storage products for uses such as personal data backup and
portable or expanded storage of digital music, photography,
video, and other data.
Hard drives provide non-volatile data storage, which means that
the data remains present when power is no longer applied to the
device. Our hard drives currently include
3.5-inch,
2.5-inch and
1.0-inch
form factor drives. The
3.5-inch
32
form factor drives have capacities ranging from 36 gigabytes
(GB) to 500 GB, nominal rotation speeds of 7,200 and
10,000 revolutions per minute (RPM), and offer
interfaces including both Enhanced Integrated Drive Electronics
(EIDE) and Serial Advanced Technology Attachment
(SATA). The
2.5-inch
form factor drives have capacities ranging from 40 GB to 160 GB,
nominal rotation speed of 5,400 RPM, and offer both the EIDE and
SATA interfaces. Our
1.0-inch
form factor, with 4 and 6 GB hard drives, used primarily in
miniature portable storage devices, have a nominal rotation
speed of 3,600 RPM and use the
CompactFlash®
130 interface.
We assemble hard drives in Malaysia and Thailand. We also design
and manufacture a substantial portion of our required magnetic
heads, head gimbal assemblies (HGA) and head stack
assemblies (HSA) in Fremont, California and Bang
Pa-In, Thailand. For geographical financial data, see
Part II, Item 8, Note 10 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements, included in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
Market
Overview
For calendar year 2005, we believe that the total market for
hard drives was more than 380 million units, or almost
$28 billion in sales. Over half of these unit shipments
were to the desktop market. Total hard drive unit growth depends
greatly on developments in the PC market. We believe that the
demand for hard drives in the PC market has grown in part due to:
|
|
|
|
|
the overall growth of PC sales;
|
|
|
|
the increasing needs of businesses and individuals for increased
storage capacity on their PCs;
|
|
|
|
the continuing development of software applications to manage
multimedia content; and
|
|
|
|
the increasing use of broadband Internet, including content
downloaded from the Internet onto PC hard drives.
|
We believe several other factors affect the rate of PC unit
growth, including maturing PC markets in North America and
Western Europe, an increase in first-time buyers of PCs in Asia,
Eastern Europe and Latin America, and the lengthening of PC
replacement cycles.
We entered the mobile market in the first quarter of 2005,
commencing volume production of our WD
Scorpiotm
family of
2.5-inch
hard drives for notebook computers. We expect the mobile market,
which is primarily notebook computers, to continue to grow
faster than the desktop or enterprise markets in the next three
years. We believe that the demand for mobile drives has grown
from approximately 16% of the overall hard drive market in 2003
to 21% of the overall hard drive market in 2005. As the mobile
market evolves to a higher volume market, we believe customers
are placing increased emphasis on attributes such as quality,
reliability, execution, flexibility, and competitive cost
structures on their hard drive suppliers. These are the same
attributes that have mattered for many years to customers in the
high-volume desktop market.
The enterprise market for hard drives focuses on customers that
make workstations, servers, network attached storage devices,
storage area networks, and other computing systems or
subsystems. We serve this market with hard drives using the SATA
interface, which is similar in performance in some applications
to the Small Computer Systems Interface (SCSI), but
more cost effective than SCSI. We believe that the enterprise
market has two distinct sectors: a marketplace for
high-performance enterprise hard drives and a marketplace for
high capacity enterprise hard drives. We believe that acceptance
of SATA in both of these enterprise market sectors is growing.
Additionally, we offer high-capacity, high reliability Parallel
Advanced Technology Attachment (PATA) enterprise
products to service video surveillance and similar PATA-based
systems. Expansion of our involvement in the enterprise market
may require us to make additional investments.
The use of hard drives in CE products has been a major growth
area in recent years. Todays three largest segments of
this market are: (1) digital television content in
applications such as DVRs; (2) audio content in
applications such as consumer handheld devices, such as MP3
players; and (3) hard drives in game consoles. Since 1999,
DVRs have been available for use in home entertainment systems
and they offer enhanced capabilities such as pausing live
television, simplifying the process of recording, cataloging
recorded television programs and quickly forwarding or returning
to any section of a recorded television program. The market for
DVR products favors large capacity hard drives and continues to
grow in Japan, North America, and Europe. We believe growth in
this market will continue to build demand for higher capacity
hard drives. Hard drives with
1.8-inch or
1.0-inch
form factors primarily address the consumer handheld device
33
and portable external storage markets. The majority of hard
drives used in portable media players that play both digital
audio and video content are
1.8-inch
form factors.
The branded products market for hard drives features storage
products that we sell directly to end customers through retail
store fronts and online stores. Our branded products include
external hard drives, which are internal drives embedded into WD
branded PC peripheral-style enclosures, which have
FireWiretm,
USB 2.0 and Ethernet network connections; and internal hard
drives that are packaged as an installation kit with the WD
brand for retail store sales. We believe the worldwide demand
for external hard drives is growing, spurred by consumers
and businesses expanding use of digital content in the
form of photographs, video and music all of which
consume large amounts of storage.
Results
of Operations
Fiscal
2006 Overview
In 2006, our net revenue increased by 19.3% to $4.3 billion
on unit shipments of 73.3 million as compared to
$3.6 billion and 61.4 million, respectively, in 2005.
In 2006, 29% of our revenue was derived from non-desktop sources
including CE products, enterprise applications, notebook
computers and retail sales as compared to 21% in 2005. Gross
margin increased to 19.1% from 16.2% in 2005. Operating income
increased by $171 million to $366 million. Operating
income increased to 8.4% as a percentage of net revenue in 2006
compared with 5.3% in 2005. We generated $402 million in
cash flow from operations in 2006 compared with
$461 million in 2005, finishing the year with
$699 million in cash and short-term investments, an
increase of $100 million from the prior year. We utilized
$54 million to repurchase 3.5 million shares of our
common stock.
Summary
Comparison of 2006, 2005 and 2004
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated,
summary information from our consolidated statements of income
(in millions except percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
July 1, 2005
|
|
|
July 2, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
4,341
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,639
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,047
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
829
|
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
590
|
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
463
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
308
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
366
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
Non-operating income
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
382
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
34
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated,
summary information regarding volume shipments, average selling
prices (ASP) and revenues by geography, channel and
product (in millions except percentages and ASP):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net revenue
|
|
$
|
4,341.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,638.8
|
|
|
$
|
3,046.7
|
|
Unit shipments
|
|
|
73.3
|
|
|
|
61.4
|
|
|
|
48.3
|
|
ASP (per unit)
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
Revenues by
Geography (%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas
|
|
|
36
|
%
|
|
|
38
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
Europe
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Revenues by
Channel (%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OEM
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
58
|
%
|
|
|
51
|
%
|
Distributors
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
Branded products
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Revenues by
Product (%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Desktop computers
|
|
|
71
|
%
|
|
|
79
|
%
|
|
|
86
|
%
|
Non-desktop sources
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Fiscal
Year 2006 Compared to Fiscal Year 2005
Net Revenue. Net revenue was $4.3 billion
for 2006, an increase of 19.3% from 2005. Total unit shipments
increased to 73.3 million as compared to 61.4 million
for the prior year. This unit increase resulted from an increase
in our desktop market share, stronger overall demand for hard
drives in the desktop market and our increasing focus on the
non-desktop market, including mobile, CE and branded products.
For example, we shipped 5.4 million drives to the mobile
market in 2006 as compared to 1.0 million units in 2005.
Additionally, we shipped 6.7 million units to the DVR
market in 2006 as compared to 3.6 million units in 2005.
ASP remained at a relatively constant level of $59 due to an
increase in the average storage capacity of hard drives sold
offset by moderate price declines. Revenue contribution by
geographic region for 2006 as compared to 2005 reflects our
continued focus on revenue growth in emerging geographic
markets, primarily in Asia. Changes in revenue by geography and
by channel generally reflect overall market demand fluctuations
for hard drives.
Gross Margin. Gross margin for 2006 was
$829 million, an increase of $239 million, or 40.5%
over the prior year. Gross margin percentage increased to 19.1%
in 2006 from 16.2% in 2005. Gross margin was favorably impacted
in 2006 by the following factors: 1) manufacturing
efficiencies, 2) lower customer returns resulting from
ongoing quality improvements that favorably impacted warranty
obligations, and 3) an increase in the average storage
capacity of hard drives sold. Moderate price declines somewhat
offset the favorable impact of the aforementioned factors.
During 2006 and 2005, our warranty accrual for prior
quarters shipments was favorably adjusted by approximately
$30 million and $1 million, respectively, as a result
of improvements in quality and customer return rates and their
expected impact on future levels of customer returns under
warranty.
Operating Expenses. Total operating expenses,
consisting of research and development (R&D) and
selling, general and administrative (SG&A)
expenses, were 10.7% of net revenue in 2006, as compared to
10.9% of net revenue in 2005. R&D expense was
$297 million in 2006, an increase of $57 million, or
23.8% over the prior year. The increase in R&D expense was
primarily related to the development of new product platforms in
support of our entry into new markets, expenditures for advanced
head technologies and an increase of $18 million in
employee incentive compensation programs, of which
$12 million related to the adoption of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS)
No. 123-R.
SG&A expense was $166 million in 2006, an increase of
$11 million, or 7.1% as compared to 2005. This increase in
SG&A expense was primarily due to an expansion of sales
resources to support increasing desktop computer demand in
certain geographic regions, the growing mobile and CE markets,
and an increase of $15 million in employee incentive
35
compensation programs, of which $7 million related to the
adoption of
SFAS No. 123-R.
The 2005 fiscal period included a $19 million charge for
the settlement of a patent infringement lawsuit.
Interest and Other Income. Net interest and
other income was $16 million and $5 million in 2006
and 2005, respectively. This increase in net interest income was
primarily due to higher average invested cash and short-term
investment balances as well as increases in the rates of return
on investments.
Income Tax Expense. Income tax (benefit)
expense was $(13) million and $4 million in 2006 and
2005, respectively. Tax (benefit) expense as a percentage of
income before taxes was (3.4)% and 2.0% for 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Differences between the effective tax rates and
the U.S. Federal statutory rate are primarily due to tax
holidays in Malaysia and Thailand that expire at various times
ranging from 2008 to 2019. In addition to the tax holidays, the
tax provision for 2006 was favorably impacted by
$22 million given the partial reduction of our valuation
allowance on deferred tax assets upon determination that it was
more likely than not that a portion of our deferred tax assets
will be realized. The realization of the deferred tax assets is
primarily dependent on our ability to generate sufficient
earnings in certain jurisdictions in fiscal years 2007 and 2008.
A two-year period is used due to the difficulty in accurately
projecting income for longer periods of time given the cyclical
nature of our industry. This assumption may change in the future
based on fluctuating industry or company conditions. The amount
of deferred tax assets considered realizable may increase or
decrease in subsequent quarters when we update our estimates of
future income. The 2005 effective tax rate benefited by
approximately 0.7% from the favorable resolution of certain tax
contingencies.
Fiscal
Year 2005 Compared to Fiscal Year 2004
Net Revenue. Net revenue was $3.6 billion
for 2005, an increase of 19.4% from 2004. Total unit shipments
increased to 61.4 million as compared to 48.3 million
for the prior year. This unit increase resulted from an increase
in our desktop market share, stronger overall demand for hard
drives in the desktop market and our increasing focus on the
non-desktop market. For example, we shipped 3.6 million
units to the DVR market in 2005 as compared to 1.0 million
units in 2004. The growth in total unit shipments was partially
offset by a $4 per unit decline in ASPs to $59 per unit for
2005. The changes in our revenue contribution by geographic
region for 2005 compared to 2004 reflect our continued focus on
revenue growth in emerging geographic markets, primarily in
Asia. Revenue derived from OEMs increased in 2005 due to higher
sales into the non-desktop markets, which are serviced primarily
by OEMs.
Gross Margin. Gross margin percentage
increased to 16.2% for 2005 from 15.2% for 2004. The increase in
gross margin percentage was impacted by continuing improvements
in quality, manufacturing cost efficiencies and product mix,
partially offset by unit price declines. Gross margin also
benefited from the ongoing accretive benefit of our head
manufacturing operations. Our 2004 gross margin was
impacted by
start-up
expenses and other charges totaling $18 million relating to
our head manufacturing operations acquired in July 2003.
Operating Expenses. Total operating expenses,
consisting of R&D and SG&A, were 10.9% of net revenue in
2005, as compared to 10.1% of net revenue in 2004. R&D
expense was $240 million and $202 million for 2005 and
2004, respectively. The increase in R&D expense was
primarily related to the development of new product platforms in
support of our entry into new markets, expenditures for advanced
head technologies and an increase of $27 million in
employee incentive compensation programs. R&D expense in
2004 included a $26 million charge for acquired in-process
research and development related to the Read-Rite asset
acquisition.
SG&A expense was $155 million and $106 million for
2005 and 2004, respectively. The increase in SG&A expense
was primarily due to an expansion of sales resources to support
increasing PC demand in certain geographic regions and the
growing mobile and CE markets and an increase of
$16 million in employee incentive compensation programs.
Fiscal 2005 included a $19 million charge for the
settlement of a patent infringement lawsuit.
Interest and Other Income. Net interest and
other income was $5 million and zero for 2005 and 2004,
respectively. The increase in net interest income in 2005 over
2004 was primarily due to a higher average cash and short-term
investment balance as well as an increase in the rates of return
on investments.
Income Tax Expense. Income tax expense was
$4 million in both 2005 and 2004. Tax expense as a
percentage of income before taxes was 2.0% and 2.6% for 2005 and
2004, respectively. Differences between the effective tax rates
and the U.S. Federal statutory rate are primarily due to
tax holidays in Malaysia and Thailand that expire at various
times
36
ranging from 2008 to 2019. The 2005 effective tax rate was
benefited by approximately 0.7% from the favorable resolution of
certain tax contingencies.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
We ended 2006 with total cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments of $699 million, an increase of
$100 million from July 1, 2005. Our investment policy
is to manage our investment portfolio to preserve principal and
liquidity while maximizing return through the full investment of
available funds. A portion of our available funds is invested in
auction rate securities, which are short-term investments in
bonds with original maturities greater than 90 days. The
following table summarizes the results of our statements of cash
flows for the three years ended June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net cash flow provided by (used
in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
402
|
|
|
$
|
461
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(337
|
)
|
|
|
(314
|
)
|
|
|
(259
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
66
|
|
|
$
|
140
|
|
|
$
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
Activities
Net cash provided by operating activities during 2006 was
$402 million as compared to $461 million during 2005
and $190 million for 2004. Cash flow from operations
consists of net income, adjusted for non-cash charges, plus or
minus working capital changes. This represents our principal
source of cash. Net cash used to fund working capital was
$173 million for 2006 as compared to net cash provided by
changes in working capital of $129 million for 2005 and net
cash used to fund working capital of $88 million for 2004.
Our working capital requirements depend upon the effective
management of our cash conversion cycle, which measures how
quickly a company can convert its products into cash through
sales. The following table summarizes the cash conversion cycle
for the three years ended 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Days sales outstanding
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
Days in inventory
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Days payables outstanding
|
|
|
(64
|
)
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash conversion cycle
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The change in the cash conversion cycle for 2006 was primarily
due to increased inventory levels compared to 2005. In addition
to the cash conversion cycle, cash flows from operating
activities were negatively impacted by prepayments to suppliers,
incentive compensation, and a legal settlement payment of
$24 million. The improvement in the cash conversion cycle
for 2005 compared to 2004 was primarily due to better alignment
in the timing of our inventory build and sales schedules. Cash
flows from operating activities for 2004 were impacted by the
payment of a $45 million litigation settlement.
From time to time, we modify the timing of payments to our
vendors. We make these modifications primarily to manage our
vendor relationships and to manage our cash flows, including our
cash balances. Generally, we make the payment modifications
through negotiations with or by granting to or receiving from
our vendors payment term accommodations.
37
Investing
Activities
Net cash used in investing activities for 2006 was
$337 million as compared to $314 million for 2005 and
$259 million for 2004. During 2006, cash used in investing
activities consisted of $302 million for capital
expenditures and $35 million for short-term investments.
During 2005, cash used in investing activities consisted of
$233 million for capital expenditures and $81 million
for short-term investments. The net cash used in investing
activities for 2004 consisted of $132 million for capital
expenditures, $95 million for the Read-Rite asset
acquisition and $32 million for short-term investments. The
increases in capital expenditures in 2006 and 2005 were
primarily a result of assets purchased to upgrade our head
manufacturing capabilities, increased desktop and mobile hard
drive production capabilities and for the normal replacement of
existing assets. Additionally, during 2006, we purchased our
previously leased head wafer manufacturing facility in Fremont,
California for $27 million. The increase in short-term
investments in 2005 was a result of additional investments in
auction rate securities. For 2007, we expect capital
expenditures to be approximately $350 million to
$375 million consisting primarily of investments in
advanced head technologies, new product platforms and capacity
for our broadening and growing product portfolio.
Financing
Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities for 2006 was
$1 million as compared to net cash used for financing
activities of $7 million for 2005 and net cash provided by
financing activities of $21 million for 2004. The net cash
provided by financing activities in 2006 consisted of
$78 million received through the exercise of common stock
options and our Employee Stock Purchase Plan, offset by
repurchases of our common stock totaling $54 million and
repayments of long-term debt totaling $23 million. The net
cash used in financing activities in 2005 consisted of
$45 million used for common stock repurchases and
$20 million for debt repayments partially offset by
$58 million received upon issuance of common stock under
employee plans. The net cash provided by financing activities
for 2004 consisted primarily of $24 million received upon
issuance of common stock under employee plans and
$14 million in net proceeds from long-term debt partially
offset by $16 million used for common stock repurchases.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
Other than facility and equipment lease commitments incurred in
the normal course of business and certain indemnification
provisions (see Capital Commitments below), we do not have any
off-balance sheet financing arrangements or liabilities,
guarantee contracts, retained or contingent interests in
transferred assets, or any obligation arising out of a material
variable interest in an unconsolidated entity. We do not have
any majority-owned subsidiaries that are not included in the
consolidated financial statements. Additionally, we do not have
an interest in, or relationships with, any special-purpose
entities.
Capital
Commitments
The following is a summary of our significant contractual cash
obligations and commercial commitments as of June 30, 2006
(in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
3-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Long-term debt, including current
portion
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
51.2
|
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
|
|
18.8
|
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
Purchase obligations*
|
|
|
4,673.0
|
|
|
|
2,628.9
|
|
|
|
2,044.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,768.2
|
|
|
$
|
2,664.7
|
|
|
$
|
2,082.3
|
|
|
$
|
14.1
|
|
|
$
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Includes long-term purchase agreements entered into before
September 15, 2006. |
38
Long-Term
Debt
We have a $125 million credit facility (Senior Credit
Facility) consisting of a revolving credit line (subject
to outstanding letters of credit and a borrowing base
calculation) and a term loan. Both the revolving credit facility
and the term loan mature on September 20, 2009 and are
secured by our accounts receivable, inventory, 65% of our stock
in foreign subsidiaries and other assets. For the year ended
June 30, 2006, we had no borrowings on the revolving credit
line and the average variable rate on our term loan was 6.5%.
The term loan requires quarterly principal payments of
approximately $3 million. Principal payments made on the
term loan increase the amount of revolving credit available. At
June 30, 2006, $97.5 million was available for
borrowing under the revolving credit line, $25 million was
outstanding on the term loan, and there was $2.5 million in
outstanding letters of credit.
The Senior Credit Facility prohibits the payment of cash
dividends on common stock and contains specific financial
covenants. We are required to maintain an available liquidity
level of $300 million at the end of each quarter. We define
available liquidity as cash plus eligible trade receivables.
Should our available liquidity be less than $300 million,
we would then be subject to minimum EBITDA (earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) requirements and
capital expenditure limitations. As of June 30, 2006, we
were in compliance with all covenants.
The terms of the Senior Credit Facility require that we deliver
to the lenders our audited financial statements within
90 days of the end of each fiscal year. As a result of the
independent investigation into our stock option accounting that
was conducted under the direction of the Special Committee, we
were delayed in completing our fiscal year 2006 audited
financial statements, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006. At our
request, the lenders under the Senior Credit Facility agreed
that we would not be in default under the Senior Credit Facility
as a result of our failure to timely deliver our 2006 audited
financial statements, or the management discussion and analysis
for our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006,
provided that the lenders receive the 2006 audited financial
statements, the management discussion and analysis for our
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006, and all
other documents reasonably requested by the lenders before the
earlier of: (a) 30 days following the filing of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
or (b) January 12, 2007. We intend to deliver our
audited financial statements to the lenders on or around the
date of filing this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Purchase
Orders
In the normal course of business, we issue purchase orders to
suppliers for the purchase of hard drive components used to
manufacture our products. These purchase orders generally cover
forecasted component supplies needed for production during the
next quarter, are recorded as a liability upon receipt of the
components, and generally may be changed or canceled at any time
prior to shipment of the components. We may be obligated to pay
for certain costs related to changes to, or cancellation of, a
purchase order, such as costs incurred for raw materials or work
in process.
We have entered into long-term purchase agreements with various
component suppliers. The commitments are subject to minimum
quality requirements. In addition, the dollar amount of the
purchases may depend on the specific products ordered and future
price negotiations. The estimated related minimum purchase
requirements are included in Purchase obligations in
the table above.
From time to time, we enter into other long-term purchase
agreements for components with certain vendors. Generally,
future purchases under these agreements are not fixed and
determinable as they depend on our overall unit volume
requirements and are contingent upon the prices, technology and
quality of the suppliers products remaining competitive.
These arrangements are not included under Purchase
obligations in the table above. Please see Item 1A of
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for a discussion of risks related to these commitments.
Forward
Exchange Contracts
We purchase short-term, forward exchange contracts to hedge the
impact of foreign currency fluctuations on certain underlying
assets, liabilities and commitments for operating expenses and
product costs denominated in foreign currencies. See
Part II, Item 7A, under the heading Disclosure
About Foreign Currency Risk, for our current forward
exchange contract commitments.
39
Indemnifications
In the ordinary course of business, we may provide
indemnifications of varying scope and terms to customers,
vendors, lessors, business partners and other parties with
respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to,
losses arising out of our breach of such agreements, services to
be provided by us, or from intellectual property infringement
claims made by third parties. In addition, we have entered into
indemnification agreements with our directors and certain of our
officers that will require us, among other things, to indemnify
them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of
their status or service as directors or officers. We maintain
director and officer insurance, which may cover certain
liabilities arising from our obligation to indemnify our
directors and officers in certain circumstances.
It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount
under these indemnification agreements due to the limited
history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and
circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Such
indemnification agreements may not be subject to maximum loss
clauses. Historically, we have not incurred material costs as a
result of obligations under these agreements.
Stock
Repurchase Program
Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase
$250 million of our common stock in open market
transactions. The term of the program is a five-year period from
November 17, 2005 to November 17, 2010. We expect
stock repurchases to be funded principally by operating cash
flows. During 2006, we repurchased 3.5 million shares of
common stock at a total cost of $54 million. During 2005,
we repurchased 4.8 million shares of common stock at a
total cost of $45 million. Since the inception of the
program and through November 10, 2006, we have repurchased
10.2 million shares for a total cost of $115 million
(including commissions). We may continue to repurchase our stock
as we deem appropriate and market conditions allow.
We believe our current cash, cash equivalents and short-term
investments will be sufficient to meet our working capital needs
through the foreseeable future. Additionally, there can be no
assurance that our Senior Credit Facility will continue to
remain available. Also, our ability to sustain our working
capital position is dependent upon a number of factors that we
discuss in Item 1A of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We currently anticipate that we will continue to utilize our
liquidity and cash flows to improve the efficiency and
capability of its existing hard drive and head manufacturing
operations.
Critical
Accounting Policies
We have prepared the accompanying consolidated financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of the
financial statements requires the use of judgment and estimates
that affect the reported amounts of revenues, expenses, assets,
liabilities and shareholders equity. We have adopted
accounting policies and practices that are generally accepted in
the industry in which we operate. We believe the following are
our most critical accounting policies that affect significant
areas and involve judgment and estimates made by us. If these
estimates differ significantly from actual results, the impact
to the consolidated financial statements may be material.
Revenue
and Accounts Receivable
In accordance with standard industry practice, we have
agreements with resellers that provide limited price protection
for inventories held by resellers at the time of published list
price reductions and other incentive programs. In accordance
with current accounting standards, we recognize revenue upon
delivery to OEMs and resellers and record a reduction to revenue
for estimated price protection and other programs in effect
until the resellers sell such inventory to their customers. We
base these adjustments on anticipated price decreases during the
reseller holding period, estimated amounts to be reimbursed to
qualifying customers, as well as historical pricing information.
If end-market demand for hard drives declines significantly, we
may have to increase sell-through incentive payments to
resellers, resulting in an increase in our allowances, which
could adversely impact operating results.
We record an allowance for doubtful accounts by analyzing
specific customer accounts and assessing the risk of loss based
on insolvency, disputes or other collection issues. In addition,
we routinely analyze the different receivable aging categories
and establish reserves based on a combination of past due
receivables and expected future losses based primarily
40
on our historical levels of bad debt losses. If the financial
condition of a significant customer deteriorates resulting in
its inability to pay its accounts when due, or if our overall
loss history changes significantly, an adjustment in our
allowance for doubtful accounts would be required, which could
affect operating results.
We establish provisions against revenue and cost of revenue for
estimated sales returns in the same period that the related
revenue is recognized. We base these provisions on existing
product return notifications. If actual sales returns exceed
expectations, an increase in the sales return accrual would be
required, which could negatively affect operating results.
Warranty
We record an accrual for estimated warranty costs when revenue
is recognized. Warranty covers costs of repair or replacement of
the hard drive over the warranty period, which generally ranges
from one to five years. We have comprehensive processes with
which to estimate accruals for warranty, which include specific
detail on hard drive reliability, such as factory test data,
historical field return rates, and costs to repair by product
type. If actual product return trends or costs to repair
returned products demonstrate significant differences from
expectations, a change in the warranty provision is made. If
these estimates differ significantly from actual results, the
impact to the consolidated financial statements may be material.
For a summary of historical changes in estimates related to
pre-existing warranty provisions, refer to Part II,
Item 8, Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Inventory
We value inventories at the lower of cost
(first-in,
first-out basis) or net realizable value. We record inventory
write-downs for the valuation of inventory at the lower of cost
or net realizable value by analyzing market conditions and
estimates of future sales prices as compared to inventory costs
and inventory balances.
We evaluate inventory balances for excess quantities and
obsolescence on a regular basis by analyzing backlog, estimated
demand, inventory on hand, sales levels and other information,
and reduce inventory balances to net realizable value for excess
and obsolete inventory based on this analysis. Unanticipated
changes in technology or customer demand could result in a
decrease in demand for one or more of our products, which may
require an increase in inventory balance adjustments that could
negatively affect operating results.
Litigation
and Other Contingencies
We apply SFAS No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, to determine when and how much to accrue
for and disclose related to legal and other contingencies.
Accordingly, we disclose contingencies deemed to be reasonably
possible and accrue loss contingencies when, in consultation
with our legal advisors, we conclude that a loss is probable and
reasonably estimable (Refer to Part II, Item 8,
Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements,
included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K).
The ability to predict the ultimate outcome of such matters
involves judgments, estimates and inherent uncertainties. The
actual outcome of such matters could differ materially from
managements estimates.
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes under the asset and liability
method, which provides that deferred tax assets and liabilities
be recognized for temporary differences between the financial
reporting basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities
and expected benefits of utilizing net operating loss
(NOL) and tax credit carryforwards. We record a
valuation allowance where it is more likely than not that the
deferred tax assets will not be realized. Each period we
evaluate the need for a valuation allowance for our deferred tax
assets and we adjust the valuation allowance so that we record
net deferred tax assets only to the extent that we conclude it
is more likely than not that these deferred tax assets will be
realized.
We record estimated liabilities for tax uncertainties. To the
extent a tax position does not meet a probable level of
certainty, a liability is established based on the best estimate
of the amount that will not be sustained. However, the actual
liability in any such contingency may be materially different
from our estimates, which could result in the need to record
additional tax liabilities or potentially adjust previously
recorded tax liabilities.
41
Stock-Based
Compensation
We account for all stock-based compensation in accordance with
the fair value recognition provisions of
SFAS No. 123-R,
Share-Based Payment. Under these provisions,
stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date
based on the value of the award and is recognized as expense
over the vesting period. Under
SFAS No. 123-R,
we are required to use judgment in estimating the amount of
stock-based awards that are expected to be forfeited. If actual
forfeitures differ significantly from the original estimate,
stock-based compensation expense and our results of operations
could be materially impacted.
Prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 123-R,
we accounted for stock-based employee compensation plans
(including shares issued under our stock option plans and ESPP)
in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees and its related interpretations (APB
No. 25), and followed the pro forma net income, pro
forma income per share, and stock-based compensation plan
disclosure requirements set forth in SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. All other
types of equity awards were previously accounted for in
accordance with SFAS No. 123.
The fair values of all stock options granted subsequent to
April 1, 2005, were estimated using a binomial model and
the fair values of all options granted prior to April 1,
2005, and all ESPP shares were estimated using the
Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model. Both the binomial and
the Black-Scholes-Merton models require the input of highly
subjective assumptions.
New
Accounting Standards
In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(FIN No. 48), Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes. FIN No. 48 clarifies the
accounting for income taxes by prescribing the minimum
recognition threshold a tax position is required to meet before
being recognized in the financial statements.
FIN No. 48 also provides guidance on derecognition,
measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting
in interim periods, disclosure and transition. The
interpretation applies to all tax positions related to income
taxes subject to SFAS No. 109. FIN No. 48 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2006. Differences between the amounts recognized in the
statements of financial position prior to the adoption of
FIN No. 48 and the amounts reported after adoption
should be accounted for as a cumulative-effect adjustment
recorded to the beginning balance of retained earnings. We are
currently evaluating the impact the adoption of
FIN No. 48 could have on our consolidated financial
statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007,
and interim periods within those fiscal years. We are currently
evaluating the impact the adoption of SFAS No. 157
could have on our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
Disclosure
About Foreign Currency Risk
Although the majority of our transactions are in
U.S. Dollars, some transactions are based in various
foreign currencies. We purchase short-term, forward exchange
contracts to hedge the impact of foreign currency fluctuations
on certain underlying assets, liabilities and commitments for
operating expenses and product costs denominated in foreign
currencies. The purpose of entering into these hedge
transactions is to minimize the impact of foreign currency
fluctuations on our results of operations. The contract maturity
dates do not exceed six months. We do not purchase short-term
forward exchange contracts for trading purposes. Currently, we
focus on hedging our foreign currency risk related to the Thai
Baht, the Euro and the British Pound Sterling. Thai Baht
contracts are designated as cash flow hedges. All other
contracts are designated as fair value hedges. See Part II,
Item 8, Note 1 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
42
As of June 30, 2006, we had outstanding the following
purchased foreign currency forward exchange contracts (in
millions, except weighted average contract rate):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Contract Rate*
|
|
|
Gain
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward
contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thai Baht
|
|
$
|
261.5
|
|
|
|
38.34
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
Euro
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
0.78
|
|
|
|
|
|
British Pound Sterling
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Expressed in units of foreign currency per dollar. |
In 2006, 2005 and 2004, total realized transaction and forward
exchange contract currency gains and losses were not material to
our consolidated financial statements.
Disclosure
About Other Market Risks
Variable
Interest Rate Risk
At our option, borrowings under the Senior Credit Facility would
bear interest at either LIBOR (with option periods of one to
three months) or a base rate, plus a margin. If LIBOR or the
base rate increases, our interest payments would also increase.
At June 30, 2006, we had a $25 million term loan
outstanding under the Senior Credit Facility. A one percent
increase in the variable rate of interest on the Senior Credit
Facility would increase interest expense by approximately
$0.2 million annually.
43
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
Index to
Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedule
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
Consolidated Financial
Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
Financial Statement
Schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
44
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
Western Digital Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Western Digital Corporation and subsidiaries as of June 30,
2006 and July 1, 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders equity and
comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in
the three-year period ended June 30, 2006. In connection
with our audits of the consolidated financial statements, we
have also audited the related financial statement schedule.
These consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Western Digital Corporation and subsidiaries as of
June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005, and the results of
their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in
the three-year period ended June 30, 2006, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also,
in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material
respects, the information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company has adopted the provisions of Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment, on July 2, 2005 and
accordingly, has changed its method of accounting for
share-based compensation.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of June 30, 2006, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated
November 17, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion on
managements assessment of, and the effective operation of,
internal control over financial reporting.
Costa Mesa, California
November 17, 2006
45
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors
Western Digital Corporation:
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A, that Western
Digital Corporation and subsidiaries maintained effective
internal control over financial reporting as of June 30,
2006, based on criteria established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
The Companys management is responsible for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on managements assessment and an opinion on the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the
company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, managements assessment that Western
Digital Corporation and subsidiaries maintained effective
internal control over financial reporting as of June 30,
2006, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (COSO). Also, in our opinion, Western
Digital Corporation and subsidiaries maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of June 30, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Western Digital Corporation and
subsidiaries as of June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005, the
related consolidated statements of income, shareholders
equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended June 30, 2006, and the
related financial statement schedule, and our report dated
November 17, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion on those
consolidated financial statements.
/s/ KPMG LLP
Costa Mesa, California
November 17, 2006
46
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note 2)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
550.7
|
|
|
$
|
485.2
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
|
|
113.2
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
481.5
|
|
|
|
402.9
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
205.1
|
|
|
|
152.9
|
|
Advances to suppliers
|
|
|
79.6
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other
|
|
|
27.2
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
1,492.2
|
|
|
|
1,181.2
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
548.6
|
|
|
|
395.0
|
|
Intangible and other assets
|
|
|
32.5
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
2,073.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,588.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
631.8
|
|
|
$
|
569.1
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
131.0
|
|
|
|
155.9
|
|
Accrued warranty
|
|
|
71.6
|
|
|
|
75.2
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
859.0
|
|
|
|
820.3
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
19.4
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
37.7
|
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
916.1
|
|
|
|
888.3
|
|
Commitments and contingent
liabilities (Note 6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $.01 par
value; authorized 5.0 shares;
Outstanding None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value;
authorized 450.0 shares;
Outstanding 221.7 and 214.6 shares, respectively
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
775.3
|
|
|
|
714.3
|
|
Accumulated comprehensive income
(loss)
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Retained earnings (deficit)
|
|
|
390.5
|
|
|
|
(4.1
|
)
|
Treasury stock common
shares at cost; 0.7 and 0.9 shares, respectively
|
|
|
(11.8
|
)
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
1,157.2
|
|
|
|
700.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
2,073.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,588.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
47
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
(in
millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
4,341.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,638.8
|
|
|
$
|
3,046.7
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
3,512.5
|
|
|
|
3,049.2
|
|
|
|
2,585.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
828.8
|
|
|
|
589.6
|
|
|
|
461.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
297.2
|
|
|
|
239.8
|
|
|
|
201.8
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
165.7
|
|
|
|
155.1
|
|
|
|
106.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
462.9
|
|
|
|
394.9
|
|
|
|
307.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
365.9
|
|
|
|
194.7
|
|
|
|
153.5
|
|
Non-operating income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
19.5
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
Interest and other expense
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-operating income
|
|
|
15.8
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
381.7
|
|
|
|
200.1
|
|
|
|
153.8
|
|
Income tax (benefit) provision
|
|
|
(12.9
|
)
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
394.6
|
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income per common
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
.94
|
|
|
$
|
.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
.90
|
|
|
$
|
.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
215.0
|
|
|
|
207.6
|
|
|
|
205.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
223.6
|
|
|
|
216.9
|
|
|
|
216.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
48
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
394.6
|
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net
income to net cash provided by operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
159.8
|
|
|
|
131.0
|
|
|
|
100.4
|
|
In-process research and
development expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
37.0
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-cash items
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(77.3
|
)
|
|
|
(90.3
|
)
|
|
|
(66.5
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(52.2
|
)
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)
|
|
|
(41.9
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
64.6
|
|
|
|
134.2
|
|
|
|
54.3
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
(27.4
|
)
|
|
|
100.2
|
|
|
|
(26.6
|
)
|
Advances to suppliers
|
|
|
(79.4
|
)
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
|
401.5
|
|
|
|
460.7
|
|
|
|
190.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(301.9
|
)
|
|
|
(233.4
|
)
|
|
|
(131.7
|
)
|
Purchases of short-term investments
|
|
|
(109.0
|
)
|
|
|
(95.4
|
)
|
|
|
(32.3
|
)
|
Redemption of short-term
investments
|
|
|
74.2
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(94.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(336.7
|
)
|
|
|
(314.3
|
)
|
|
|
(258.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock under
employee plans
|
|
|
77.6
|
|
|
|
57.8
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
(53.5
|
)
|
|
|
(45.0
|
)
|
|
|
(16.0
|
)
|
Net proceeds from long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
Repayment of long-term debt
|
|
|
(23.4
|
)
|
|
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
|
21.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
65.5
|
|
|
|
139.7
|
|
|
|
(47.7
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents,
beginning of year
|
|
|
485.2
|
|
|
|
345.5
|
|
|
|
393.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of
year
|
|
$
|
550.7
|
|
|
$
|
485.2
|
|
|
$
|
345.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash
flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for
income taxes
|
|
$
|
4.9
|
|
|
$
|
4.9
|
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
Cash paid during the period for
interest
|
|
$
|
1.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.9
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of
non-cash investing and financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment acquired under capital
lease
|
|
$
|
14.7
|
|
|
$
|
4.3
|
|
|
$
|
18.5
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
49
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
(Accumulated
|
|
|
Shareholders
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Deficit)
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Balance at June 27, 2003
(as previously reported)
|
|
|
203.6
|
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
675.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(334.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
327.4
|
|
|
$
|
179.5
|
|
Adjustment to opening
shareholders equity (Note 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 27, 2003
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
203.6
|
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
690.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(349.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
327.1
|
|
|
$
|
176.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ESPP shares issued
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
(16.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
149.8
|
|
|
|
149.8
|
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
Unrealized gain on foreign
currency contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at July 2,
2004
|
|
|
208.8
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
(29.2
|
)
|
|
|
714.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(200.1
|
)
|
|
|
487.2
|
|
|
$
|
150.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ESPP shares issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
|
|
|
(3.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
44.0
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.8
|
)
|
|
|
(45.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196.0
|
|
|
|
196.0
|
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
Unrealized loss on foreign
currency contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at July 1,
2005
|
|
|
214.6
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
714.3
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(4.1
|
)
|
|
|
700.3
|
|
|
$
|
195.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ESPP shares issued
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
39.4
|
|
|
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
(53.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394.6
|
|
|
|
394.6
|
|
|
$
|
394.6
|
|
Unrealized gain on foreign
currency contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30,
2006
|
|
|
221.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
775.3
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
$
|
390.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,157.2
|
|
|
$
|
395.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
consolidated financial statements.
50
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
|
|
Note 1.
|
Organization
and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Western Digital Corporation (the Company or
Western Digital or WD) designs,
develops, manufactures and sells hard drives. A hard drive is a
device that stores data on one or more rotating magnetic disks
to allow fast access to data. The Companys hard drives are
used in desktop computers, notebook computers, external storage
devices, enterprise applications such as servers, workstations,
network attached storage and storage area networks and in
consumer electronics products such as personal/digital video
recorders, satellite and cable set-top boxes and video game
consoles. The Company sells its products worldwide to original
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) for inclusion in
computer systems or subsystems, and to distributors, resellers
and retailers.
Western Digital has prepared its consolidated financial
statements in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States (GAAP) and has adopted
accounting policies and practices which are generally accepted
in the industry in which it operates. The Companys
significant accounting policies are summarized below.
Fiscal
Year
The Company has a 52 or
53-week
fiscal year. The 2006 and 2005 fiscal years, which ended on
June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005, respectively,
consisted of 52 weeks each. Fiscal year 2004, which ended
on July 2, 2004, was a
53-week year.
Basis of
Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant
intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation. The accounts of foreign subsidiaries have been
remeasured using the U.S. dollar as the functional
currency. As such, gains or losses resulting from remeasurement
of these accounts from local currencies into U.S. dollars
are reflected in the results of operations. These gains and
losses were immaterial to the consolidated financial statements.
Cash
Equivalents
The Companys cash equivalents represent highly liquid
investments, primarily money market funds and commercial paper,
with original maturities of three months or less.
Short-Term
Investments
The Companys short-term investments consist primarily of
auction rate securities, which are short-term investments in
bonds with original maturities greater than 90 days. The
Company has classified these investments as available for
sale securities under Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 115 Accounting for
Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities. These
investments are carried at fair value.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts
receivable, short-term investments, accounts payable and accrued
expenses approximate fair value for all periods presented
because of the short-term maturity of these assets and
liabilities. The carrying amount of the Companys term loan
also approximates fair value.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
The Company designs, develops, manufactures and markets hard
drives to computer manufacturers, resellers and retailers
throughout the world. The Company performs ongoing credit
evaluations of its customers financial condition and
generally requires no collateral. The Company maintains
allowances for potential credit losses, and such losses have
historically been within managements expectations. At any
given point in time, the total amount outstanding from any one
of a number of its customers may be individually significant to
the Companys financial results. At June 30, 2006 and
July 1, 2005, the Company had reserves for potential credit
losses of $4.6 million and $3.0 million, respectively.
The Company also has cash equivalent and short-term investment
policies that limit the amount of credit exposure to any one
financial institution or investment instrument and require that
investments be made only with financial institutions or in
investment instruments evaluated as highly credit-worthy.
51
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Inventory
Valuation
The Company values inventory at the lower of cost
(first-in,
first-out basis) or net realizable value. Inventory write-downs
are recorded for the valuation of inventory at the lower of cost
or net realizable value by analyzing market conditions and
estimates of future sales prices as compared to inventory costs
and inventory balances. The Company evaluates inventory balances
for excess quantities and obsolescence on a regular basis by
analyzing backlog, estimated demand, inventory on hand, sales
levels and other information, and reduces inventory balances to
net realizable value for excess and obsolete inventory based on
this analysis.
Property
and Equipment
The cost of property and equipment is depreciated over the
estimated useful lives of the respective assets. The
Companys buildings are being depreciated over periods
ranging from fifteen to thirty years. The majority of the
Companys equipment is being depreciated over periods of
three to seven years. Depreciation is computed on a
straight-line basis. Leasehold improvements are amortized over
the lesser of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the
related lease terms.
Intangible
Assets
Intangible assets consist of purchased technology acquired
during the 2004 Read-Rite Corporation asset acquisition (See
Note 4). These assets are being amortized over a weighted
average period of three years.
Revenue
Recognition
The Company recognizes revenue in accordance with SEC Staff
Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 104,
Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements. Under
SAB No. 104, revenue is recognized when the title and
risk of loss have passed to the customer, there is persuasive
evidence of an arrangement, delivery has occurred, or services
have been rendered, the sales price is fixed or determinable and
collectibility is reasonably assured. The Company establishes
provisions against revenue and cost of revenue for estimated
sales returns in the same period that the related revenue is
recognized based on existing product return notifications.
In accordance with standard industry practice, the Company has
agreements with resellers that provide limited price protection
for inventories held by resellers at the time of published list
price reductions and other incentive programs. Either party may
terminate these agreements upon written notice. In the event of
termination, the Company may be obligated to repurchase a
certain portion of the resellers inventory. The Company
records a reduction to revenue for estimated price protection
and other programs in effect until the resellers sell such
inventory to their customers. These adjustments are based on
anticipated price decreases during the reseller holding period,
estimated amounts to be reimbursed to qualifying customers, as
well as historical pricing information. If end-market demand for
hard drives declines significantly, the Company may have to
increase sell-through incentive payments to resellers, resulting
in an increase in price protection allowances, which could
adversely impact operating results. Net revenue recognized on
sales to resellers was approximately $2.0 billion,
$1.5 billion and $1.5 billion in 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Repurchases of reseller inventory were not
material in 2006, 2005 or 2004.
Western Digital establishes an allowance for doubtful accounts
by analyzing specific customer accounts and assessing the risk
of loss based on insolvency, disputes or other collection
issues. In addition, the Company routinely analyzes the
different receivable aging categories and its bad debt loss
history and establishes reserves based on a combination of past
due receivables and expected future losses based primarily on
the Companys historical levels of bad debt losses. If the
financial condition of a significant customer deteriorates
resulting in its inability to pay its accounts when due, or if
the overall loss history of the Company changes significantly,
an adjustment in the Companys allowance for doubtful
accounts would be required, which could affect operating results.
52
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Warranty
The Company records an accrual for estimated warranty costs as
products are sold. Warranty covers costs of repair or
replacement of the hard drive over the warranty period, which
ranges from one to five years and is recorded in the
accompanying balance sheet as current or long-term based upon
when the expenditure is expected to occur. The Company has
comprehensive processes with which to estimate accruals for
warranty, which include specific detail on hard drives in the
field by product type, historical field return rates and costs
to repair. Return rate and repair cost estimates are reviewed
quarterly and updated to reflect the impact of current results
on prior expectations. Although the Company believes that it has
the continued ability to reasonably estimate warranty reserves,
unforeseeable changes could cause a material change in the
Companys warranty accrual estimate. Such a change would be
recorded in the period in which it was identified.
Advertising
Expense
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Selling, general and
administrative expenses of the Company include advertising costs
of $1.4 million, $1.5 million and $1.5 million in
2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Income
Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and
liability method, which provides that deferred tax assets and
liabilities be recognized for temporary differences between the
financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the assets and
liabilities and expected benefits of utilizing net operating
loss (NOL) carryforwards. The Company records a
valuation allowance where it is more likely than not that the
deferred tax assets will not be realized. Each period the
Company evaluates the need for a valuation allowance for the
deferred tax assets and adjusts the valuation allowance so that
the Company records net deferred tax assets only to the extent
that it has concluded it is more likely than not that these
deferred tax assets will be realized.
The Company records estimated liabilities for tax uncertainties.
To the extent a tax position does not meet a probable level of
certainty, a liability is established based on the best estimate
of the amount that will not be sustained. However, the actual
liability in any such contingency may be materially different
from the estimates, which could result in the need to record
additional tax liabilities or potentially adjust previously
recorded tax liabilities.
Per Share
Information
The Company computes basic income per share using the net income
and the weighted average number of common shares outstanding
during the period. Diluted income per share is computed using
the net income and the weighted average number of common shares
and potentially dilutive common shares outstanding during the
period. Potentially dilutive common shares include outstanding
employee stock options, employee stock purchase plan shares and
restricted stock awards. The following table illustrates the
computation of basic and diluted income per common share (in
millions, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
394.6
|
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
215.0
|
|
|
|
207.6
|
|
|
|
205.7
|
|
Employee stock options and other
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
223.6
|
|
|
|
216.9
|
|
|
|
216.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
1.84
|
|
|
$
|
.94
|
|
|
$
|
.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
1.76
|
|
|
$
|
.90
|
|
|
$
|
.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Antidilutive common share
equivalents excluded*
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
53
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
* |
|
For purposes of computing diluted income per share, common share
equivalents with an exercise price that exceeded the average
fair market value of common stock for the period are considered
antidilutive and have been excluded from the calculation for
employee stock options. |
Stock-Based
Compensation
Effective July 2, 2005, the Company accounts for all
stock-based compensation in accordance with the fair value
recognition provisions in
SFAS No. 123-R,
Share-Based Payment. Under the fair value
recognition provisions of
SFAS No. 123-R,
stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date
based on the value of the award and is recognized on a
straight-line basis as expense over the vesting period. Under
SFAS No. 123-R,
the Company is required to use judgment in estimating the amount
of stock-based awards that are expected to be forfeited. If
actual forfeitures differ significantly from the original
estimate, stock-based compensation expense and the results of
operations could be materially impacted.
Prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 123-R,
the Company accounted for stock-based employee compensation
plans (including shares or other equity instruments issued under
its stock incentive plans and employee stock purchase plan) in
accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and its
related interpretations (APB No. 25), and
followed the pro forma net income, pro forma income per share,
and stock-based compensation plan disclosure requirements set
forth in SFAS No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation.
The fair values of all stock options granted subsequent to
January 1, 2005 were estimated using a binomial model and
the fair values of all options granted prior to
December 31, 2004 and all ESPP shares were estimated using
the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model. Both the binomial
and the Black-Scholes-Merton models require the input of highly
subjective assumptions.
Other
Comprehensive Income
Other comprehensive income refers to revenue, expenses, gains
and losses that are recorded as an element of shareholders
equity but are excluded from net income. The Companys
other comprehensive income is comprised of unrealized gains and
losses on foreign currency contracts and marketable securities
categorized as available for sale under SFAS No. 115.
Foreign
Exchange Contracts
Although the majority of the Companys transactions are in
U.S. Dollars, some transactions are based in various
foreign currencies. The Company purchases short-term, forward
exchange contracts to hedge the impact of foreign currency
fluctuations on certain underlying assets, liabilities and
commitments for operating expenses and product costs denominated
in foreign currencies. The contracts have maturity dates that do
not exceed six months. The Company does not purchase short-term
forward exchange contracts for trading purposes.
The Company applies the provisions of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, as amended, which establishes accounting and
reporting standards for derivative instruments embedded in other
contracts and for hedging activities. The Company had
outstanding forward exchange contracts with commercial banks for
the Thai Baht, British Pound Sterling and Euro with values of
$263.8 million and $151.4 million at June 30,
2006 and July 1, 2005, respectively. Thai Baht contracts
are designated as cash flow hedges under SFAS No. 133.
If the derivative is designated as a cash flow hedge, the
effective portion of the change in fair value of the derivative
is initially deferred in other comprehensive income (loss), net
of tax. These amounts are subsequently recognized into earnings
when the underlying cash flow being hedged is recognized into
earnings. Hedge effectiveness is measured by comparing the
hedging instruments cumulative change in fair value from
inception to maturity to the underlying exposures terminal
value. The Company has determined that all of its hedging
instruments for all years presented were fully effective as
defined under SFAS No. 133.
54
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
All other contracts are designated as fair value hedges. These
contracts are not designated as hedging instruments under
U.S. GAAP, and therefore, the change in the
instruments fair value is recognized currently in earnings
and is reported as a component of non-operating income. Changes
in fair value on these contracts were not material to the
consolidated financial statements for all years presented.
Use of
Estimates
Company management has made estimates and assumptions relating
to the reporting of certain assets and liabilities in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles. These estimates
and assumptions have been applied using methodologies, which are
consistent throughout the periods presented. However, actual
results could differ from these estimates.
New
Accounting Standards
In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation
(FIN) No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty
in Income Taxes, an interpretation of Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. FIN No. 48 clarifies the accounting for
income taxes by prescribing the minimum recognition threshold a
tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the
financial statements. FIN No. 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition, measurement, classification, interest
and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and
transition. The interpretation applies to all tax positions
related to income taxes subject to SFAS No. 109.
FIN No. 48 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006. Differences between the amounts
recognized in the statements of financial position prior to the
adoption of FIN No. 48 and the amounts reported after
adoption should be accounted for as a cumulative-effect
adjustment recorded to the beginning balance of retained
earnings. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the
adoption of FIN No. 48 could have on its consolidated
financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value in U.S. GAAP, and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal
years. The Company is currently evaluating the impact the
adoption of SFAS No. 157 could have on its
consolidated financial statements.
Reclassifications
Advances to suppliers were greater than 5% of total current
assets during 2006 and, as such, have been separately classified
on the consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2006.
Prior period amounts on the consolidated balance sheet have been
reclassified to conform to the current period presentation as
follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Previous
|
|
2005
|
|
Classification
|
|
|
Classification
|
|
|
Advances to suppliers
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
27.0
|
|
|
|
Note 2.
|
Adjustment
to Previously Issued Financial Statements
|
The Company has adjusted its consolidated financial statements
for the years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, to
record additional non-cash stock-based compensation expense, and
related tax accruals, resulting from stock options granted
during fiscal years 1998 to 2003 that were incorrectly accounted
for under U.S. GAAP. The decision to adjust the financial
statements was based on the facts obtained from an independent
investigation into the Companys stock option accounting
that was conducted under the direction of a special committee
(Special Committee) of its Board of Directors
(Board). The Board created the Special Committee,
which was composed solely of independent directors, to conduct a
voluntary, company-initiated review of matters related to past
stock option grants, including the timing of such grants and
associated documentation.
55
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Special Committee reviewed all option grants of the Company
during the period from July 1, 1997 through June 30,
2006 (the Review Period). The Special Committee
reviewed corporate records and electronic documentation and
interviewed current and former employees and directors. The
Special Committee presented its investigative findings and
recommendations to the Board and the Companys independent
auditors, KPMG LLP.
At the completion of its investigation, the Special Committee
identified, and the Companys management concurred, that
the appropriate measurement date for 28 option grants made on 27
separate grant dates during the period from fiscal 1998 through
fiscal 2004 differed from the originally stated grant dates for
such awards. Because the prices at the originally stated grant
dates were, in 19 of such instances, lower than the prices on
the appropriate measurement dates for such grants, management
determined the Company should have recognized stock-based
compensation expense and additional tax expense in its
historical financial statements for these 19 grants. For the
remaining 9 grants, since the prices at the originally stated
grant dates were at or above the prices on the appropriate
measurement dates for such grants, the Company determined that
no accounting adjustment should be made for these grants.
For 19 grants made during the period from fiscal 1998 through
fiscal 2003, the Companys stock price at the appropriate
measurement date was higher than the price on the originally
stated grant dates. As a result, stock-based compensation
expense should have been recognized, as well as additional tax
expense in historical financial statements for these 19 grants.
Based on these findings, management has determined that the
Company should have recognized approximately $21 million of
stock based and tax-related expenses.
Approximately $13.2 million, before tax-related expenses,
of these additional expenses were attributable to annual
employee stock option grants made by the Compensation Committee
in November 1998 and 1999 and a special employee grant made in
March 2000 for which there was inadequate or no support for
selection of the grant dates, and the grant dates were at a low
price in the relevant period. These grants were made by
unanimous written consent of the Compensation Committee of the
Board.
Approximately $4.2 million, before tax-related expenses, of
these additional expenses were attributable to annual employee
stock option grants made in September 2001 and 2002. For these
grants, acting at a meeting, the Compensation Committee approved
specific grants for Section 16(b) Officers and an overall
budgeted number of shares for grants to employees that were not
Section 16(b) Officers to be allocated by later management
action. The allocation of awards to employees that were not
Section 16(b) Officers was not completed with finality by
the grant date.
Approximately $1.0 million, before tax-related expenses,
additional expenses were attributable to grants involving a
variety of administrative errors, including errors in
administration of grants to new hires and in connection with
promotions, and errors in supporting documentation.
The Company determined that the cumulative pre-tax non-cash
stock-based compensation expense resulting from revised
measurement dates was approximately $18.4 million for
fiscal years 1998 to 2006. This additional compensation expense
relates to stock options covering approximately
12.6 million shares. Additionally, the Company recorded
$2.5 million in tax-related expenses resulting from the
recharacterization of incentive stock options to non-qualified
stock options for fiscal years 1998 to 2006. The following table
summarizes the impact of the related adjustments (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
Fiscal Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
1998 to 2003
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
15.4
|
|
|
$
|
18.4
|
|
Tax-related expenses
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.4
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
$
|
15.7
|
|
|
$
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table reflects the consolidated income statement
classification of the additional stock-based compensation and
tax-related expenses related to the adjustment for fiscal years
1998 to 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenues
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
Research and development expense
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
Selling, general and
administrative expense
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The adjustments reduce previously reported diluted earnings per
share (diluted EPS) by $0.01 each for both of the
years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004. Because the
Company concluded that the foregoing adjustments were not
material to its historical financial statements, it has not
amended, and does not intend to amend, any of its other
previously filed annual reports on
Form 10-K
or quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
for the periods affected by the adjustments.
The following tables set forth the effects of the adjustments on
certain line items within the Companys consolidated
statements of income and cash flows for the years ended
July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004 and consolidated balance
sheet as of July 1, 2005 (in millions, except per share
amounts):
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 1, 2005
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
154.1
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
|
$
|
155.9
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
818.5
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
820.3
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
886.5
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
888.3
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
696.5
|
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
714.3
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
(19.6
|
)
|
|
|
(4.1
|
)
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
702.1
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
700.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 2, 2004
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
697.4
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
714.2
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(182.9
|
)
|
|
|
(17.2
|
)
|
|
|
(200.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27, 2003
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
675.4
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
|
|
690.8
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(334.2
|
)
|
|
|
(15.7
|
)
|
|
|
(349.9
|
)
|
57
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended July 1, 2005
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
$
|
3,049.0
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
3,049.2
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
589.8
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
589.6
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
238.5
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
239.8
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
154.4
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
155.1
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
392.9
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
394.9
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
196.9
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
194.7
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
202.3
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
200.1
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
198.4
|
|
|
|
(2.4
|
)
|
|
|
196.0
|
|
Income per common
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
.96
|
|
|
|
(.02
|
)
|
|
$
|
.94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
.91
|
|
|
|
(.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended July 2, 2004
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
$
|
2,585.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
2,585.3
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
461.6
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
461.4
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
201.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
201.8
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
105.7
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
106.1
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
306.7
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
307.9
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
154.9
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
153.5
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
155.2
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
153.8
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
151.3
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
149.8
|
|
Income per common
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
.74
|
|
|
|
(.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
.70
|
|
|
|
(.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended July 1, 2005
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
198.4
|
|
|
$
|
(2.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Changes in accrued expenses
|
|
|
98.8
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
100.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended July 2, 2004
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
151.3
|
|
|
$
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Changes in accrued expenses
|
|
|
(26.8
|
)
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(26.6
|
)
|
|
|
Note 3.
|
Supplemental
Financial Statement Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Inventories:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
$
|
119.5
|
|
|
$
|
78.7
|
|
Work in process
|
|
|
62.3
|
|
|
|
59.7
|
|
Raw materials and component parts
|
|
|
23.3
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
205.1
|
|
|
$
|
152.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and Equipment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land and buildings
|
|
$
|
163.2
|
|
|
$
|
77.5
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
906.3
|
|
|
|
708.0
|
|
Machinery and equipment recorded
under capital leases
|
|
|
37.5
|
|
|
|
22.8
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
29.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,142.9
|
|
|
|
845.1
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(594.3
|
)
|
|
|
(450.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net property and equipment
|
|
$
|
548.6
|
|
|
$
|
395.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation on machinery and equipment recorded
under capital leases was $10.4 million and
$4.0 million as of June 30, 2006 and July 1,
2005, respectively.
|
|
Note 4.
|
Read-Rite
Asset Acquisition
|
In June 2003, Read-Rite Corporation (Read-Rite),
then one of the Companys suppliers of magnetic recording
heads, commenced voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy
proceedings. On July 31, 2003, Western Digital purchased
substantially all of the assets of Read-Rite, including its
wafer fabrication equipment in Fremont, California and
manufacturing facility in Bang Pa-In, Thailand. The cost of the
acquisition was $172.0 million and consisted of cash
consideration of $94.8 million, assumed debt obligations of
the Thailand operations of approximately $60.2 million and
direct costs of the acquisition and other miscellaneous assumed
obligations totaling $17.0 million. The Company
59
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
accounted for this transaction as an asset acquisition. The
estimated fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities
assumed were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
17.4
|
|
Property and equipment
|
|
|
90.2
|
|
Purchased technology
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
172.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of the date of the acquisition, Read-Rite had two in-process
research and development (IPR&D) projects:
120 gigabyte per platter and 160 gigabyte per platter
products. The fair value allocated to these projects as part of
the acquisition was $17.8 million and $7.8 million,
respectively. The multi-period excess earnings method, a
discounted cash flow income approach, was used to determine the
value allocated to the IPR&D. The rate utilized to discount
the cash flows to their present values was based on the weighted
average cost of capital and an additional risk premium based on
an analysis of the technology and the IPR&D stages of
completion. Based on these factors, 27% was used as the annual
discount rate. These acquired IPR&D projects had not reached
technological feasibility and had no alternative future use.
Accordingly, the Company recorded the $25.6 million as a
charge to research and development expense at the time of the
acquisition.
Approximately $38.8 million of the purchase price related
to purchased technology and is being amortized over a weighted
average period of three years. Accumulated amortization related
to these assets was $31.9 million, $27.6 million and
$13.2 million at June 30, 2006, July 1, 2005 and
July 2, 2004, respectively. During the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2006, July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, the
Company recorded $4.3 million, $14.4 million and
$13.2 million of amortization expense related to these
intangible assets, respectively. Amortization expense is
estimated to be $3.4 million and $3.4 million for
fiscal years 2007 and 2008, respectively.
|
|
Note 5.
|
Short-term
Borrowings and Long-term Debt
|
Short-term borrowings and long-term debt consisted of the
following as of June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005
(in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Term loan
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
$
|
37.5
|
|
Capital lease obligations
(Note 6)
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
44.0
|
|
|
|
52.7
|
|
Less amounts due in one year
|
|
|
(24.6
|
)
|
|
|
(20.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
19.4
|
|
|
$
|
32.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line of
Credit
The Company has a $125 million credit facility
(Senior Credit Facility) consisting of a revolving
credit line (subject to outstanding letters of credit and a
borrowing base calculation) and a term loan. Both the revolving
credit facility and the term loan mature on September 20,
2009 and are secured by the Companys accounts receivable,
inventory, 65% of its stock in its foreign subsidiaries and
other assets. For the year ended June 30, 2006, the Company
had no borrowings on the revolving credit line and the average
variable rate on the Companys term loan was 6.5%. The term
loan requires quarterly principal payments of approximately
$3 million. Principal payments made on the term loan
increase the amount of revolving credit available. At
June 30, 2006, the Company had $97.5 million available
for borrowing under the revolving credit line, $25 million
outstanding on the term loan, and $2.5 million in
outstanding letters of credit.
60
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Senior Credit Facility prohibits the payment of cash
dividends on common stock and contains specific financial
covenants. The Company is required to maintain an available
liquidity level of $300 million at the end of each quarter.
Available liquidity is defined as cash plus eligible trade
receivables. Should the Companys available liquidity be
less than $300 million, the Company would then be subject
to minimum EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation
and amortization) requirements and capital expenditure
limitations. As of June 30, 2006, the Company was in
compliance with all covenants.
The terms of the Senior Credit Facility require that the Company
deliver to the lenders audited financial statements within
90 days of the end of each fiscal year. As a result of the
independent investigation into the Companys stock option
accounting that was conducted under the direction of the Special
Committee, the Company was delayed in completing its fiscal year
2006 audited financial statements, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
and its Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006. At the
Companys request, the lenders under the Senior Credit
Facility agreed that the Company would not be in default under
the Senior Credit Facility as a result of its failure to timely
deliver its 2006 audited financial statements, or the management
discussion and analysis for its Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006,
provided that the lenders receive the 2006 audited financial
statements, the management discussion and analysis for its
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
as of and for the period ending September 29, 2006, and all
other documents reasonably requested by the lenders before the
earlier of: (a) 30 days following the filing of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
or (b) January 12, 2007. The Company intends to
deliver its audited financial statements to the lenders on or
around the date of filing this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
Note 6.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Lease
Commitments
The Company leases certain facilities and equipment under
long-term, non-cancelable operating and capital leases. The
Companys operating leases consist of leased property and
equipment that expire at various dates through 2012. Rental
expense under these operating leases, including
month-to-month
rentals, was $16.1 million, $16.2 million and
$14.9 million in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The
Companys capital leases consist of leased equipment. These
leases have maturity dates through December 1, 2008 and
interest rates averaging approximately 5.2%. Future minimum
lease payments under operating and capital leases that have
initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one
year at June 30, 2006 are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
11.2
|
|
|
$
|
12.8
|
|
2008
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
2009
|
|
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
2010
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total future minimum payments
|
|
$
|
51.2
|
|
|
$
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: interest on capital leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total principal payable on capital
leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
Warranty Liability
The Company records an accrual for estimated warranty costs when
revenue is recognized. Warranty covers costs of repair or
replacement of the hard drive over the warranty period, which
generally ranges from one to five years. This accrual is based
on estimated future returns within the warranty period and costs
to repair, using factory test data, historical field returns and
current average repair costs by product type. Return rate and
repair cost estimates are reviewed
61
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
quarterly and updated to reflect the impact of current results
on prior expectations. If actual product return trends or costs
to repair returned products demonstrate significant differences
from expectations, a change in the warranty accrual is made.
Changes in the warranty accrual for the years ended
June 30, 2006, July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004 were
as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Warranty accrual, beginning of
period
|
|
$
|
91.9
|
|
|
$
|
56.8
|
|
|
$
|
52.9
|
|
Charges to operations
|
|
|
76.5
|
|
|
|
82.0
|
|
|
|
60.6
|
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(49.0
|
)
|
|
|
(46.3
|
)
|
|
|
(55.1
|
)
|
Changes in estimate related to
pre-existing warranties
|
|
|
(30.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warranty accrual, end of period
|
|
$
|
89.4
|
|
|
$
|
91.9
|
|
|
$
|
56.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued warranty also includes amounts classified in non-current
liabilities of $17.8 million at June 30, 2006,
$16.7 million at July 1, 2005, and $10.4 million
at July 2, 2004.
Long-term
Purchase Agreements
The Company has entered into long-term purchase agreements with
various component suppliers. The commitments depend on specific
products ordered and may be subject to minimum quality
requirements and future price negotiations. For 2007, 2008, and
2009, WD expects these commitments to total approximately
$885 million, $1.075 billion and $970 million,
respectively. In conjunction with these agreements, the Company
has advanced approximately $92 million related to 2007 and
2008 purchase commitments, of which $80 million is included
in advances to suppliers and $12 million is included in
other long-term assets as of June 30, 2006.
|
|
Note 7.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
In the normal course of business, the Company is subject to
legal proceedings, lawsuits and other claims. Although the
ultimate aggregate amount of monetary liability or financial
impact with respect to these matters is subject to many
uncertainties and is therefore not predictable with assurance,
management believes that any monetary liability or financial
impact to the Company from these matters or the specified
matters below, individually and in the aggregate, beyond that
provided at June 30, 2006, would not be material to the
Companys financial condition. However, there can be no
assurance with respect to such result, and monetary liability or
financial impact to the Company from these legal proceedings,
lawsuits and other claims could differ materially from those
projected.
In June 1994, Papst Licensing (Papst) brought suit
against the Company alleging infringement by the Company of five
hard drive motor patents owned by Papst. In December 1994, Papst
dismissed its case without prejudice. In July 2002, Papst
filed a new complaint against the Company and several other
defendants alleging infringement by the Company of seventeen of
Papsts patents related to hard drive motors that the
Company purchased from motor vendors. Papst sought an injunction
and damages. The Company filed an answer on September 4,
2002, denying Papsts complaint, and the lawsuit was
subsequently stayed pending the outcome of certain other related
litigation. On July 4, 2005, the Company entered into a
Settlement and License Agreement with Papst. In connection with
the settlement, the Company made a one-time payment of
$24 million to Papst on July 29, 2005, of which
$19 million represented a charge to selling, general and
administrative expense for the Companys 2005 fiscal fourth
quarter ($5 million had been accrued in a prior year). In
exchange for the payment, Papst has dismissed with prejudice its
lawsuit pending against the Company, granted the Company a
fully-paid license to certain patents owned by Papst, and
released the Company of all past, present and future claims
alleging infringement by the Company of those Papst patents. The
Settlement and License Agreement resolved all outstanding
litigation between the two companies without any admission of
infringement by the Company.
62
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Since the Companys announcement on July 27, 2006 that
it was conducting a company-initiated, voluntary review of its
historical stock option grants, several purported derivative
actions were filed nominally on behalf of the Company against
certain current and former directors and officers of the Company
in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California and the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of Orange. These complaints assert claims for
violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act, accounting, breach of fiduciary duty and/or aiding
and abetting, constructive fraud, waste of corporate assets,
unjust enrichment, rescission, breach of contract, violation of
the California Corporations Code, abuse of control, gross
mismanagement, and constructive trust in connection with the
Companys option granting practices. The complaints seek
unspecified monetary damages and other relief against the
individual defendants and certain governance reforms affecting
the Company. The Company is named solely as a nominal defendant
in each action. The Company has joined or intends to join the
other defendants in filing motions to dismiss each action.
|
|
Note 8.
|
Shareholders
Equity
|
Stock
Incentive Plans
The Company has four stock-based incentive plans (collectively
referred to as the Stock Plans): The 2004 amended
and restated Performance Incentive Plan, the Employee Stock
Option Plan, the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan and the Stock
Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors. Subsequent to the
expiration of the Employee Stock Option Plan on
November 10, 2004 and approval of the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan by the Companys shareholders on
November 18, 2004, no new awards are permitted under the
Employee Stock Option Plan, the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan
or the Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors
(collectively referred to as the Prior Stock Plans).
As of June 30, 2006, options to purchase 9.8 million
shares of the Companys common stock remain outstanding
under the Prior Stock Plans, of which 7.2 million shares
were exercisable and 0.2 million shares of restricted stock
remain unvested. Options granted under the Prior Stock Plans
vested over periods from one to four years. Options granted
under the Prior Stock Plans expire either five or ten years from
the date of grant.
In November 2004, the Companys shareholders approved the
2004 Performance Incentive Plan. Subsequently, in November 2005,
the Companys shareholders approved an authorization for an
additional 13 million shares. The types of awards that may
be granted under the 2004 Performance Incentive Plan include
stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock,
stock bonuses and other forms of awards granted or denominated
in the Companys common stock or units of the
Companys common stock, as well as certain cash bonus
awards. Persons eligible to receive awards under the 2004
Performance Incentive Plan include officers or employees of the
Company or any of its subsidiaries, directors of the Company and
certain consultants and advisors to the Company or any of its
subsidiaries. The vesting of awards under the Performance
Incentive Plan is determined at the date of grant. Each award
expires on a date determined at the date of grant; however, the
maximum term of options, stock appreciation rights and other
rights to acquire common stock under the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan is ten years after the grant date of the award.
As of June 30, 2006, the maximum number of shares of the
Companys common stock that are authorized for award grants
under the 2004 Performance Incentive Plan is 21.7 million
shares. Any shares subject to awards under the prior stock plans
that are cancelled, forfeited, or otherwise terminate without
having vested or been exercised, as applicable, will become
available for other award grants under the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan. The 2004 Performance Incentive Plan will
terminate on September 21, 2014 unless terminated earlier
by the Companys Board of Directors.
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
During the second quarter of 2006, the Company adopted the
Western Digital Corporation 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(ESPP) whereby eligible employees may authorize
payroll deductions of up to 10% of their eligible compensation
to purchase shares of the Companys common stock at 95% of
the fair market value of common stock on either the date of
grant or on the exercise date, whichever is less. The date of
grant of each offering period is June 1st or
December 1st, except for the initial offering period, which
began on December 15, 2005. Each offering period is
24 months and consists of four exercise dates. If the fair
market value of the common stock is less on a given exercise
date
63
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
than on the date of grant, employee participation in that
offering period is terminated and re-enrollment in the new
offering period occurs automatically. The Companys ESPP
operates in accordance with Section 423 of the Internal
Revenue Code. The 1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, which was
previously suspended by the Board of Directors, terminated upon
stockholder approval of the 2005 ESPP.
Stock-Based
Compensation Expense
Effective July 2, 2005, the Company adopted Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised 2004),
Share-Based Payment
(SFAS No. 123-R)
using the modified prospective method.
SFAS No. 123-R
establishes the financial accounting and reporting standards for
stock-based compensation plans. As required by
SFAS No. 123-R,
the Company recognized the cost resulting from all share-based
payment transactions including shares issued under the
Companys stock option plans and employee stock purchase
plans in the financial statements. During the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2006, the Company expensed $21.1 million
related to stock-based compensation from stock options and ESPP
shares as a result of the adoption of
SFAS No. 123-R.
At June 30, 2006, total compensation cost related to
unvested stock options granted to employees and ESPP shares, but
not yet recognized, was $31.1 million and will be amortized
on a straight-line basis over a weighted average period of
approximately 1.9 years.
Pro forma
Information for Periods Prior to the Adoption of
SFAS No. 123-R
Prior to July 2, 2005, the Company accounted for
stock-based employee compensation plans (including shares issued
under the Companys stock option plans and ESPP) in
accordance with APB No. 25 and followed the pro forma net
income, pro forma income per share, and stock-based compensation
plan disclosure requirements set forth in the Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation
(SFAS No. 123). The following table sets
forth the computation of basic and diluted income per share for
the years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, and
illustrates the effect on net income and income per share as if
the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of
SFAS No. 123 to stock-based employee compensation (in
millions, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
July 2,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$
|
196.0
|
|
|
$
|
149.8
|
|
Stock-based employee compensation
included in reported earnings
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
Stock-based employee compensation
expense determined under fair-value based methods for all awards
|
|
|
(29.5
|
)
|
|
|
(29.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income
|
|
$
|
171.3
|
|
|
$
|
123.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$
|
0.94
|
|
|
$
|
0.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.83
|
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
0.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.79
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The pro forma income per share information for all stock options
granted on or prior to December 31, 2004, as well as all
ESPP shares granted on or prior to July 1, 2005, is
estimated using the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model.
The Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model was developed for
use in estimating the fair value of traded options that have no
vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. For stock
options granted subsequent to December 31,
64
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2004, the pro forma income per share information is estimated
using a binomial model. Both the Black-Scholes-Merton and the
binomial option pricing models require the input of highly
subjective assumptions such as the expected stock price
volatility and expected employee exercise behavior. The
resulting fair value of employee stock options is amortized on a
straight-line basis over the service period of the options.
Stock
Options
The following table summarizes activity under the Stock Plans
(in millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Contractual Life
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Options outstanding at
June 27, 2003
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
$
|
6.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
11.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
5.08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled or expired
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
10.94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding at
July 2, 2004
|
|
|
25.1
|
|
|
|
7.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
10.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(9.2
|
)
|
|
|
5.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled or expired
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
9.07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding at
July 1, 2005
|
|
|
19.5
|
|
|
|
9.39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
17.22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(7.6
|
)
|
|
|
8.36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled or expired
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
11.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding at
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.65
|
|
|
|
6.10
|
|
|
$
|
123.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at June 30,
2006
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
9.67
|
|
|
|
4.83
|
|
|
$
|
83.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated as the difference
between the exercise price of the underlying awards and the
quoted price of the Companys common stock for those awards
that have an exercise price currently below the quoted price. As
of June 30, 2006, the Company had options outstanding to
purchase an aggregate of 11.3 million shares with an
exercise price below the quoted price of the Companys
stock resulting in an aggregate intrinsic value of
$123.6 million. During the years ended June 30, 2006
and July 1, 2005, the aggregate intrinsic value of options
exercised under the Companys stock option plans was
$84.1 million and $62.2 million, respectively,
determined as of the date of exercise.
65
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following tables summarize information about options
outstanding and exercisable under the Stock Plans at
June 30, 2006 (in millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Range of
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Contractual Life*
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
Exercise Prices
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
(in years)
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
$ 2.10 3.50
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
4.43
|
|
|
$
|
2.47
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
$
|
2.47
|
|
3.64 4.40
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
5.96
|
|
|
|
3.91
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
3.92
|
|
4.44 6.58
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
4.41
|
|
|
|
5.59
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
5.60
|
|
6.64 8.58
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
5.32
|
|
|
|
7.88
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
7.95
|
|
8.63 8.89
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
8.22
|
|
|
|
8.88
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
8.86
|
|
8.99 11.96
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
7.10
|
|
|
|
10.50
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
10.70
|
|
11.98 12.84
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
7.42
|
|
|
|
12.64
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
12.74
|
|
12.88 13.76
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
6.41
|
|
|
|
13.40
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
13.03
|
|
13.95 31.88
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
6.21
|
|
|
|
20.51
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
22.04
|
|
32.69 48.50
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
34.29
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
34.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
|
6.10
|
|
|
$
|
10.65
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
9.67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Represents the weighted average remaining contractual lives of
the options outstanding. |
Deferred
Stock Compensation
The Company granted approximately 2.0 million,
1.6 million and 0.1 million shares of restricted stock
during 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Of the restricted
stock granted in fiscal 2006, 1.7 million represents
outstanding restricted stock units and 0.3 million
represents restricted stock awards (which are not deemed to be
outstanding until vesting occurs). The restricted stock vests
annually over periods from two to four years. The aggregate
market value of the restricted stock at the date of issuance was
$26.5 million, $17.1 million and $1.3 million in
2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. These amounts have been
recorded as deferred compensation, a separate component of
shareholders equity, and are being amortized to operating
expense over the corresponding vesting periods. For purposes of
valuing these awards, the Company has assumed a forfeiture rate
of zero based on an historical analysis indicating minimal
forfeitures for these types of awards. For the year ended
June 30, 2006, the Company charged to expense
$15.9 million related to restricted stock awards that were
vested during the period. Of this amount, $7.2 million
represented the incremental cost from the modification of
pre-existing awards. As of June 30, 2006, the aggregate
unamortized fair value of all unvested restricted stock awards
was $26.4 million, which will be amortized on a
straight-line basis over a weighted average vesting period of
approximately 1.5 years.
During 2005, the Company also awarded certain executives and
other key employees 0.5 million restricted stock units with
performance-based vesting (Performance Shares).
However, during 2006, the Company cancelled all outstanding
Performance Shares. The impact of these awards, and subsequent
cancellation, were not material to the consolidated financial
statements.
66
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock
Reserved for Issuance
The following table summarizes all shares of common stock
reserved for issuance at June 30, 2006 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Maximum shares issuable in
connection with:
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding awards and shares
available for award grants
|
|
|
26.7
|
|
ESPP
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
Value Disclosure Binomial Model
The fair value of stock options granted for the year ended
June 30, 2006, was estimated using a binomial option
pricing model. For all options granted between January 1,
2005 and June 30, 2006, the pro forma income per share
information was estimated using a binomial model. The binomial
model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions
including the expected stock price volatility, the expected
price multiple at which employees are likely to exercise stock
options and the expected employee forfeiture rate. The Company
uses historical data to estimate option exercise, employee
termination, and expected stock price volatility within the
binomial model. The risk-free rate for periods within the
contractual life of the option is based on the
U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The fair value of stock options granted during the year ended
June 30, 2006 was estimated using the following weighted
average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
Suboptimal exercise factor
|
|
1.58
|
Range of risk-free interest rates
|
|
4.01% to 5.21%
|
Range of expected volatility
|
|
0.38 to 0.82
|
Weighted average expected
volatility
|
|
.67
|
Post-vesting termination rate
|
|
14.00%
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
Fair value
|
|
$7.11
|
The fair value of stock options granted during the six months
ended July 1, 2005 was estimated using the following
weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
July 1, 2005
|
|
Suboptimal exercise factor
|
|
1.79
|
Range of risk-free interest rates
|
|
3.34% to 4.46%
|
Range of expected volatility
|
|
0.43 to 0.84
|
Weighted average expected
volatility
|
|
.70
|
Post-vesting termination rate
|
|
13.54%
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
Fair value
|
|
$4.86
|
Fair
Value Disclosure Black-Scholes-Merton
Model
Pro forma information regarding net income and earnings per
share is required by SFAS No. 123. This information is
required to be determined as if the Company had accounted for
its stock options (including shares issued under the Stock
Incentive Plans and the ESPP, collectively called
Options) granted subsequent to July 1, 1995,
under the fair value method of that statement.
67
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The pro forma income per share information for all stock options
granted on or prior to December 31, 2004 as well as all
ESPP shares granted on or prior to June 30, 2006 was
estimated using the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model.
The Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model was developed for
use in estimating the fair value of traded options that have no
vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. The
Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model requires the input of
highly subjective assumptions such as the expected stock price
volatility and the expected period until options are exercised.
The pro forma impact of applying SFAS No. 123 at
June 30, 2006 is not necessarily representative of future
periods.
The fair values of all stock options granted on or prior to
December 31, 2004 and all ESPP shares granted on or prior
to June 30, 2006 have been estimated at the date of grant
using a Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model with the
following weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Option Plans
|
|
|
ESPP
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Option life (in years)
|
|
|
4.51
|
|
|
|
3.94
|
|
|
|
1.21
|
|
|
|
1.25
|
|
|
|
1.25
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
3.23
|
%
|
|
|
1.65
|
%
|
|
|
4.45
|
%
|
|
|
2.25
|
%
|
|
|
1.09
|
%
|
Stock price volatility
|
|
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
0.55
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value
|
|
$
|
5.33
|
|
|
$
|
6.56
|
|
|
$
|
3.85
|
|
|
$
|
3.00
|
|
|
$
|
4.73
|
|
Stock
Repurchase Program
The Companys Board of Directors has authorized the
repurchase of up to $250 million of the Companys
common stock in open market transactions. Stock repurchases are
expected to be funded principally from operating cash flows.
During 2006, the Company repurchased 3.5 million shares of
common stock at a total cost of $53.5 million (including
commissions). Between July 1, 2006 and November 10,
2006 the Company has not repurchased any additional common
stock. Since the inception of the program, and through
November 10, 2006, the Company has repurchased
10.2 million shares for a total cost of $115 million
(including commissions). The Company may continue to repurchase
its stock as it deems appropriate and market conditions allow.
Stock
Purchase Rights
In 1989, the Company implemented a plan to protect
shareholders rights in the event of a proposed takeover of
the Company. Under the plan, each share of the Companys
outstanding common stock carried one Right to Purchase
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock (the
Right). The Right enabled the holder, under certain
circumstances, to purchase common stock of Western Digital or of
an acquiring company at a substantially discounted price ten
days after a person or group publicly announces it has acquired
or has tendered an offer for 15% or more of the Companys
outstanding common stock. On September 10, 1998, the
Companys Board of Directors approved the adoption of a new
Rights plan to replace the previous plan, which expired in
September 1998. The Rights under the 1998 plan were similar to
the rights under the 1989 plan except they were redeemable by
the Company at $.01 per Right and expired in 2008. In
connection with the establishment of a holding company structure
on April 6, 2001, the Company terminated the Rights under
the 1998 plan and adopted a new Rights plan. The 2001 plan is
similar to the terminated 1998 plan, except that the exercise
price was reduced from $150.00 to $50.00 per share and the
expiration date for the 2001 Rights plan was extended to April
2011.
|
|
Note 9.
|
Western
Digital Corporation 401(k) Plan
|
Effective July 1, 1991, the Company adopted the Western
Digital Corporation 401(k) Plan (the Plan) formerly
known as the Western Digital Corporation Retirement Savings and
Profit Sharing Plan. The Plan covers substantially all domestic
employees, subject to certain eligibility requirements. The
Company may make annual contributions to the
68
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Plan at the discretion of the Board of Directors. For 2006, 2005
and 2004 the Company made contributions to the Plan of
$3.6 million, $3.0 million and $2.9 million,
respectively.
|
|
Note 10.
|
Business
Segment, International Operations and Major Customers
|
Segment
Information
As of June 30, 2006, the Company operated in one segment,
the hard drive business.
International
Operations
The Companys operations outside the United States include
manufacturing facilities in Malaysia and Thailand as well as
sales offices throughout Canada, Europe, Asia, Japan, India and
the Middle East. The following table summarizes the
Companys operations by geographic areas for the three
years ended June 30, 2006 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Revenue from external
customers(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
1,386
|
|
|
$
|
1,268
|
|
|
$
|
1,141
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
1,550
|
|
|
|
1,197
|
|
|
|
885
|
|
Europe, the Middle East and Africa
|
|
|
1,225
|
|
|
|
1,069
|
|
|
|
901
|
|
Other
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,341
|
|
|
$
|
3,639
|
|
|
$
|
3,047
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-lived assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
261
|
|
|
$
|
163
|
|
|
$
|
121
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
|
|
181
|
|
Europe, the Middle East and Africa
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
581
|
|
|
$
|
407
|
|
|
$
|
302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Revenue is attributed to geographic regions based on location of
customer. |
Major
Customer
During 2006, 2005 and 2004, sales to Dell accounted for 12%, 16%
and 14% of the Companys revenue, respectively.
Pre-tax
Income
The domestic and foreign components of income (loss) before
income taxes were as follows for the three years ended
June 30, 2006 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
$
|
272.3
|
|
|
$
|
236.2
|
|
|
$
|
199.4
|
|
Domestic
|
|
|
109.4
|
|
|
|
(36.1
|
)
|
|
|
(45.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
381.7
|
|
|
$
|
200.1
|
|
|
$
|
153.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Income
Tax (Benefit) Provision
The components of the (benefit) provision for income taxes were
as follows for the three years ended June 30, 2006 (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
$
|
5.8
|
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
Domestic-federal
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
Domestic-state
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax (benefit) provision
|
|
$
|
(12.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
4.1
|
|
|
$
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining net undistributed earnings from foreign subsidiaries
at June 30, 2006 on which no U.S. tax has been
provided amounted to approximately $834.7 million. The net
undistributed earnings are intended to finance local operating
requirements. Accordingly, an additional U.S. tax provision
has not been made on these earnings.
Deferred
Taxes
Temporary differences and carryforwards, which give rise to a
significant portion of deferred tax assets and liabilities as of
June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005 were as follows (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves and accrued expenses not
currently deductible
|
|
$
|
99.0
|
|
|
$
|
81.5
|
|
Domestic net operating loss (NOL)
carryforward
|
|
|
67.0
|
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
Business credit carryforward
|
|
|
60.8
|
|
|
|
55.3
|
|
All other
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
28.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
255.1
|
|
|
|
292.9
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(232.8
|
)
|
|
|
(292.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
22.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion (included in other
current assets)
|
|
$
|
10.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Non-current portion (included in
other non-current assets)
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
22.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves and accrued expenses not currently deductible consisted
of the following as June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005 (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Sales related reserves and
adjustments
|
|
$
|
68.8
|
|
|
$
|
58.6
|
|
Accrued compensation and benefits
|
|
|
21.0
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Inventory reserves and adjustments
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reserves and accrued
expenses not currently deductible
|
|
$
|
99.0
|
|
|
$
|
81.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A substantial portion of the fully valued net operating losses
(NOL) noted above may be reduced as a result of tax
uncertainties. In addition to the deferred tax assets presented
above, the Company had additional NOL benefits related to stock
option deductions of approximately $93.8 million and
$67.5 million at June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005,
respectively. In accordance with the provisions of
SFAS No. 123-R,
this will be recorded as a credit to shareholders equity
when an incremental benefit is recognized after considering all
other tax attributes available to the Company. Accordingly,
these amounts are excluded from the table above. The 2005
deferred tax assets presented above have been reclassified to
reflect the 2006 presentation.
The Company determines deferred taxes for each of its tax-paying
subsidiaries within each tax jurisdiction. The Companys
deferred tax assets, which consist primarily of NOL and tax
credit carryforwards, have previously been fully reserved in the
form of a valuation allowance. At the end of fiscal 2006, the
Company determined that it is more likely than not that a
portion of these assets will be realized. Accordingly, the
Company reduced a portion of the valuation allowance which
resulted in the recognition of a net deferred tax asset of
$22.3 million. The valuation of the deferred tax assets is
based on an assumption of the Companys ability to generate
sufficient earnings in certain jurisdictions in fiscal years
2007 and 2008. This two-year period is used due to the
difficulty in accurately projecting income for longer periods of
time given the cyclical nature of hard drive industry. This
assumption may change in the future based on fluctuating
industry or company conditions. The amount of deferred tax
assets may increase or decrease in subsequent quarters as the
Company updates its estimates of future taxable income or
re-evaluates the two-year assumption.
Effective
Tax Rate
Reconciliation of the U.S. Federal statutory rate to the
Companys effective tax rate is as follows for the three
years ended June 30, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
(as adjusted)
|
|
|
U.S. Federal statutory rate
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
Tax rate differential on
international income
|
|
|
(25.3
|
)
|
|
|
(39.9
|
)
|
|
|
(43.8
|
)
|
Utilization of domestic NOL
carryforward
|
|
|
(16.0
|
)
|
|
|
(22.5
|
)
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
Tax effect of repatriation
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in non-NOL deductible
temporary differences not benefited
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
15.3
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
State income taxes, net
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)%
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax
Holidays and Carryforwards
A substantial portion of the Companys manufacturing
operations in Malaysia and Thailand operate under various tax
holidays and tax incentive programs which will expire in whole
or in part at various dates through 2019. Certain of the
holidays may be extended if specific conditions are met. The net
impact of these tax holidays and tax incentives was to increase
the Companys net earnings by $81.1 million
($.36 per diluted share), $66.7 million ($.31 per
diluted share) and $54.9 million ($.25 per diluted
share) in 2006, 2005, and 2004 respectively.
As of June 30, 2006, the Company had federal and state NOL
carryforwards of approximately $380.9 million and
$338.6 million, respectively. In addition, the Company had
various federal and state tax credit carryforwards combined of
approximately $60.8 million. The loss carryforwards
available to offset future federal and state taxable income
expire at various times from 2019 to 2021 and 2007 to 2025,
respectively. Approximately $20.6 million of the credit
carryforwards available to offset future taxable income expire
at various times from 2007 to 2025. The remaining amount is
available indefinitely.
71
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
Note 12.
|
Quarterly
Results of Operations (unaudited)
|
The Company has adjusted its consolidated financial statements
for fiscal 2006 and 2005 to record additional non-cash
stock-based compensation expense and related tax accruals
resulting from stock options granted during fiscal years 1998 to
2003 that were incorrectly accounted for under U.S. GAAP
(see Note 2). The following table summarizes the quarterly
impact of these adjustments on results of operations (in
millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30,
2006
|
2006 First
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
1,009.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,009.9
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
178.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178.3
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
67.9
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
67.7
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
68.8
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
68.6
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Second
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
1,117.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,117.1
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
228.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
228.3
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
104.3
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
104.1
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
104.3
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
104.1
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Third
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
1,128.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,128.8
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
217.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
217.9
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
100.7
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
100.2
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
102.9
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
102.4
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Fourth
Quarter(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
1,085.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,085.5
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
204.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
204.4
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
93.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93.9
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
119.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119.5
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previously
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
|
|
|
|
Reported
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
FISCAL YEAR ENDED JULY 1,
2005
|
2005 First
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
823.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
823.6
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
113.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113.1
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
30.4
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 Second
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
954.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
954.9
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
150.2
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
150.1
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
56.6
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
55.8
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
56.0
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 Third
Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
919.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
919.9
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
167.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
167.0
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
70.7
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
70.3
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
70.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
70.4
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 Fourth
Quarter(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue, net
|
|
$
|
940.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
940.4
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
159.5
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
159.4
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
38.4
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
37.7
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
40.3
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The fourth quarter of 2006 included a $13.1 million benefit
to gross margin related to the resolution of certain items that
impacted amounts previously recorded as costs primarily in
earlier quarters of 2006, and a $22.3 million benefit to
income taxes from the change in valuation allowance for deferred
income taxes. |
|
(2) |
|
The fourth quarter of 2005 included a $19.0 million charge
for settlement of litigation, which was recorded in selling,
general and administrative expense. |
73
WESTERN
DIGITAL CORPORATION
Three
years ended June 30, 2006
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for
|
|
|
|
Doubtful
|
|
|
|
Accounts
|
|
|
Balance at June 27,
2003
|
|
$
|
5.2
|
|
Charges to operations
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at July 2,
2004
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
Charges to operations
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at July 1,
2005
|
|
$
|
3.0
|
|
Charges to operations
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30,
2006
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Adjustment
to Previously Issued Financial Statements
We have adjusted our consolidated financial statements for the
years ended July 1, 2005 and July 2, 2004, as well as
the selected financial data for the years ended June 27,
2003 and June 28, 2002, to record additional non-cash
stock-based compensation expense, and related tax accruals,
resulting from stock options granted during fiscal years 1998 to
2003 that were incorrectly accounted for under
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP). Our decision to adjust our financial
statements was based on the facts obtained from an independent
investigation into our stock option accounting that was
conducted under the direction of a special committee
(Special Committee) of our Board of Directors. The
Board created the Special Committee, which was composed solely
of independent directors, to conduct a voluntary,
company-initiated review of matters related to past stock option
grants, including the timing of such grants and associated
documentation. The Special Committee reviewed all option grants
of the Company during the period from July 1, 1997 through
June 30, 2006 (the Review Period). The Special
Committee reviewed corporate records and electronic
documentation and interviewed current and former employees and
directors. The Special Committee presented its investigative
findings and recommendations to the Board of Directors and our
independent auditors, KPMG LLP.
At the completion of its investigation, the Special Committee
identified, and our management concurred, that the appropriate
measurement date for 28 option grants made on 27 separate grant
dates during the period from fiscal 1998 through fiscal 2004
differed from the originally stated grant dates for such awards.
Because the prices at the originally stated grant dates were, in
19 of such instances, lower than the prices on the appropriate
measurement dates for such grants, our management determined we
should have recognized stock-based compensation expense and
additional tax expense in our historical financial statements
for these 19 grants. For the remaining 9 grants, since the
prices at the originally stated grant dates were at or above the
prices on the appropriate measurement dates for such grants, we
determined that no accounting adjustment should be made for
these grants.
At the conclusion of its investigation, the Special Committee
made recommendations to our Board for process improvements, all
of which were adopted and are in the process of being
implemented by our management. Our management concluded that the
nature of these process improvements did not indicate any
control deficiencies that would constitute a material weakness
or change our conclusion below that our internal controls were
designed and operating effectively as of June 30, 2006. For
further discussion regarding the adjustment to previously issued
financial statements, see Part II, Item 8
Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As required by SEC
Rule 13a-15(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), we carried out an evaluation, under
the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our
disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period
covered by this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e) of
the Exchange Act). In designing and evaluating the disclosure
controls and procedures, our management recognizes that any
controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and
operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the
desired control objectives, and our management is required to
apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship
of possible controls and procedures.
Based on the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer concluded that, as of the end of the period
covered by this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
our disclosure controls and procedures were effective such that
information pertaining to Western Digital, including our
consolidated subsidiaries, required to be disclosed in our
reports filed under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SECs rules and forms, and that such information is
accumulated and communicated to our management, including
75
our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as
appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding required
disclosures.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f) of
the Exchange Act) to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. Internal control over
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that in
reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions
and dispositions of our assets; (ii) provide reasonable
assurance that the transactions are recorded as necessary to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts
and expenditures are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of our management and our directors; and
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition
of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Our management evaluated the effectiveness of our internal
control over financial reporting using the criteria set forth by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO) in Internal Control Integrated
Framework. Based on this evaluation, our management
concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was
effective as of the end of the period covered by this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
KPMG LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm that
audited the consolidated financial statements included in this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
has issued an attestation report on our assessment of our
internal control over financial reporting. See page 46
herein.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There has been no change in our internal control over financial
reporting during the fourth fiscal quarter ended June 30,
2006 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Inherent
Limitations of Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and its
Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that our disclosure
controls and procedures or our internal controls over financial
reporting will prevent all error and all fraud. A control
system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide
only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of
the control system are met. Further, the benefits of controls
must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the
inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of
controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues
and instances of fraud, if any, have been detected. These
inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in
decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur
because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can
be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by
collusion of two or more people, or by management override of
the control. The design of any system of controls is also based
in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future
events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future
conditions. Because of the inherent limitations in a
cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
76
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the Registrant
|
Please refer to Part I of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
under Item 1. Business Executive Officers
of the Registrant, for information concerning our
executive officers.
Set forth below are the current directors names, age, year
in which each was first elected as a member of our Board of
Directors, and biographical information:
Matthew E. Massengill, 45, has been a member of our Board
of Directors since January 2000. He joined us in 1985 and has
served in various executive capacities. From October 1999 until
January 2000, he served as Chief Operating Officer, from January
2000 until January 2002, he served as President, and from
January 2000 until October 2005, he served as Chief Executive
Officer. Mr. Massengill has served as Chairman of the Board
of Directors since November 2001. He is also a director of
ViewSonic Corporation.
Peter D. Behrendt, 67, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since 1994. He was Chairman of Exabyte Corporation, a
manufacturer of computer tape storage products, from January
1992 until he retired in January 1998 and was President and
Chief Executive Officer of Exabyte Corporation from July 1990 to
January 1997. Mr. Behrendt is currently a venture partner
with NEA, a California-based venture fund. He is also a director
of Infocus Corporation.
Kathleen A. Cote, 57, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since January 2001. Ms. Cote was the Chief
Executive Officer of Worldport Communications, Inc., a European
provider of Internet managed services, from May 2001 to June
2003. From September 1998 until May 2001, she served as
President of Seagrass Partners, a provider of expertise in
business planning and strategic development for early stage
companies. From November 1996 until January 1998, she served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of Computervision
Corporation, an international supplier of product development
and data management software. She is also a director of Forgent
Networks, Inc.
John F. Coyne, 56, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since October 2006. Mr. Coyne joined us in 1983
and has served in various executive capacities. From November
2002 until June 2005, Mr. Coyne served as Senior Vice
President, Worldwide Operations, from June 2005 until September
2005, he served as Executive Vice President, Worldwide
Operations and from November 2005 until June 2006, he served as
Executive Vice President and Chief Operations Officer. Effective
June 2006, he was named President, Chief Operating Officer.
Henry T. DeNero, 60, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since June 2000. He was Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Homespace, Inc., a provider of Internet real estate
and home services, from January 1999 until it was acquired by
LendingTree, Inc. in August 2000. From July 1995 to January
1999, he was Executive Vice President and Group Executive,
Commercial Payments for First Data Corporation, a provider of
information and transaction processing services. Prior to 1995,
he was Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of Dayton
Hudson Corporation, a general merchandise retailer, and was
previously a Director of McKinsey & Company, a
management-consulting firm. He is also a director of Banta
Corporation, Digital Insight Corporation, PortalPlayer, Inc.,
THQ, Inc. and Vignette Corp.
William L. Kimsey, 64, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since March 2003. He is a veteran of
32 years service with Ernst & Young, a
global independent auditing firm, and became that firms
Global Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Kimsey served at
Ernst & Young as director of management consulting in
St. Louis, office managing partner in Kansas City, Vice
Chairman and Southwest Region managing partner in Dallas, Vice
Chairman and West Region managing partner in Los Angeles, Deputy
Chairman and Chief Operating Officer and, from 1998 to 2002,
Chief Executive Officer and a global board member. He is also a
director of Accenture Ltd., NAVTEQ Corporation and Royal
Caribbean Cruises Ltd.
Michael D. Lambert, 59, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since August 2002. From 1996 until he retired in May
2002, Mr. Lambert served as Senior Vice President for Dell
Inc.s Enterprise Systems Group. During that period, he
also participated as a member of a six-man operating committee
at Dell, which reported to the Office of the Chairman.
Mr. Lambert served as Vice President, Sales and Marketing
for Compaq Computer Corporation from 1993 to 1996. Prior to
that, for four years, he ran the Large Computer Products
division at NCR/AT&T
77
Corporation as Vice President and General Manager.
Mr. Lambert began his career with NCR Corporation, where he
served for 16 years in product management, sales and
software engineering capacities. He is also a director of
Vignette Corp.
Roger H. Moore, 64, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since June 2000. Mr. Moore served as President
and Chief Executive Officer of Illuminet Holdings, Inc., a
provider of network, database and billing services to the
communications industry, from January 1996 until it was acquired
by Verisign, Inc. in December 2001 and he retired at that time.
He was a member of Illuminets Board of Directors from July
1998 until December 2001. From September 1998 to October 1998,
he served as President, Chief Executive Officer and as a
director of VINA Technologies, Inc., a telecommunications
equipment company. From November 1994 to December 1995, he
served as Vice President of major accounts of Northern Telecom.
He is also a director of Arbinet-thexchange, Inc., Consolidated
Communications Holdings, Inc., Tut Systems, Inc., and Verisign,
Inc.
Thomas E. Pardun, 63, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since 1993. Mr. Pardun served as Chairman of our
Board of Directors from January 2000 until November 2001 and as
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Edge2net,
Inc., a provider of voice, data and video services, from
November 2000 until September 2001. Mr. Pardun was
President of MediaOne International Asia Pacific (previously
U.S. West International, Asia-Pacific, a subsidiary of
U.S. West, Inc.), an owner/operator of international
properties in cable television, telephone services, and wireless
communications companies, from May 1996 until his retirement in
July 2000. Before joining U.S. West, Mr. Pardun was
President of the Central Group for Sprint, as well as President
of Sprints West Division and Senior Vice President of
Business Development for United Telecom, a predecessor company
to Sprint. Mr. Pardun also held a variety of management
positions during a
19-year
tenure with IBM, concluding as Director of product-line
evaluation. He is also a director of CalAmp Corporation, Exabyte
Corporation and Occam Networks, Inc.
Arif Shakeel, 51, has been a member of our Board of
Directors since September 2004. Mr. Shakeel joined us in
1985 and has served in various executive capacities. From
February 2000 until April 2001, he served as Executive Vice
President and General Manager of Hard Disk Drive Solutions, from
April 2001 until January 2003, he served as Executive Vice
President and Chief Operating Officer, and from January 2002
until June 2006, he served as President. He was named Chief
Executive Officer in October 2005.
Director
Independence
Our Board of Directors has reviewed and discussed information
provided by the directors and our company with regard to each
directors business and personal activities as they may
relate to Western Digital or its management. Based on its review
of this information and all other relevant facts and
circumstances, our Board of Directors has affirmatively
determined that, except for serving as a member of our Board of
Directors, none of Messrs. Behrendt, DeNero, Kimsey,
Lambert, Moore and Pardun or Ms. Cote has any relationship,
material or immaterial, with Western Digital either directly or
as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has
a relationship with Western Digital, and that each of such
directors qualifies as independent as defined by the
listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange.
Messrs. Massengill, Shakeel and Coyne are each full-time,
executive-level employees of Western Digital; therefore,
Messrs. Massengill, Shakeel and Coyne are not
independent as defined by the corporate governance
listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange.
Committees
Our Board of Directors has standing Executive, Audit,
Compensation and Governance Committees. The Governance
Committee, among other things, performs functions similar to a
nominating committee. Our Board of Directors
78
usually determines the membership of these committees at its
organizational meeting held immediately after the annual meeting
of stockholders. The following table identifies the current
members of the committees:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Executive
|
|
|
Audit
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Governance(1)
|
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill
|
|
|
Chair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter D. Behrendt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kathleen A. Cote
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Henry T. DeNero
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Chair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William L. Kimsey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael D. Lambert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chair
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger H. Moore
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
Thomas E. Pardun
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
Chair(1
|
)
|
Arif Shakeel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Chairman of the Governance Committee also serves as our lead
outside director and presides at all executive sessions of
non-management directors. |
Audit Committee. Our Board of Directors has
determined that all members of the Audit Committee are
independent as defined under the listing standards of the New
York Stock Exchange and applicable rules of the Securities and
Exchange Commission and that Mr. DeNero is an audit
committee financial expert as defined by rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board of Directors has
also determined that Mr. Kimseys simultaneous service
on three other public company audit committees will not impair
his ability to effectively serve on our Audit Committee.
The Audit Committee operates pursuant to a written charter that
is available on our website under the Governance section at
www.westerndigital.com and is also available in print to
any stockholder who delivers a written request to our Secretary
at our principal executive offices. As described in further
detail in the written charter of the Audit Committee, the key
responsibilities of the Audit Committee include: (1) sole
responsibility for the appointment, compensation, retention and
oversight of our independent accountants and, where appropriate,
the termination or replacement of the independent accountants;
(2) an annual evaluation of the independent
accountants qualifications, performance and independence,
including a review and evaluation of the lead partner;
(3) pre-approval of all auditing services and permissible
non-auditing services to be performed by the independent
accountants; (4) receipt and review of the reports from the
independent accountants required annually and prior to the
filing of any audit report by the independent accountants;
(5) review and discussion with the independent accountants
of any difficulties they encounter in the course of their audit
work; (6) establishment of policies for the hiring of any
current or former employee of the independent accountants;
(7) review and discussion with management and the
independent accountants of our annual and quarterly financial
statements prior to their filing or public distribution;
(8) general review and discussion with management of the
presentation and information to be disclosed in our earnings
press releases; (9) periodic review of the adequacy of our
accounting and financial personnel resources; (10) periodic
review and discussion of our internal control over financial
reporting and review and discussion with our principal internal
auditor of the scope and results of our internal audit program;
(11) review and discussion of our policies with respect to
risk assessment and risk management; (12) preparation of
the audit committee report included in our proxy statement;
(13) establishment of procedures for the receipt, retention
and treatment of complaints regarding accounting, internal
accounting controls or auditing matters, and the confidential,
anonymous submission of such complaints by company employees;
(14) review of material pending legal proceedings involving
us and other material contingent liabilities; and
(15) review of any other matters relative to the audit of
our accounts and preparation of our financial statements that
the Audit Committee deems appropriate.
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.
Under the securities laws of the United States, our directors
and officers and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of
our common stock must report their initial ownership of our
equity securities and any subsequent changes in that ownership
to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock
Exchange. The Securities and Exchange
79
Commission has established specific due dates for these reports,
and we must disclose this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
any late filings during fiscal 2006. To our knowledge, based
solely on our review of the copies of such reports required to
be furnished to us with respect to fiscal 2006 and the written
responses to annual directors and officers
questionnaires that no other reports were required, all of these
reports were timely filed.
Corporate
Governance Guidelines and Code of Business Ethics.
Our Board of Directors has adopted Corporate Governance
Guidelines, which provide the framework for the governance of
Western Digital and represent the Boards current views
with respect to selected corporate governance issues considered
to be of significance to stockholders. Our Board of Directors
has also adopted a Code of Business Ethics that applies to all
of our directors, employees and officers, including our Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting
Officer and Controller. The current versions of the Corporate
Governance Guidelines and the Code of Business Ethics are
available on our website under the Governance section at
www.westerndigital.com and are available in print to any
stockholder who delivers a written request to our Secretary at
our principal executive offices. In accordance with rules
adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New
York Stock Exchange, we intend to disclose future amendments to
certain provisions of the Code of Business Ethics, or waivers of
such provisions granted to executive officers and directors, on
our website under the Governance section at
www.westerndigital.com.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
Summary
Compensation Table.
The following table sets forth the compensation paid for fiscal
2006 to all individuals serving as Chief Executive Officer
during fiscal 2006 and to our four other most highly compensated
executive officers who were serving as executive officers at the
end of fiscal 2006 (collectively, the Named Executive
Officers).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
Payouts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Compensation*
|
|
Restricted
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Annual
|
|
Stock/Stock
|
|
Underlying
|
|
LTIP
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
Salary
|
|
Bonus
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Unit
|
|
Options/SARs**
|
|
Payouts
|
|
Compensation
|
Name and Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
($)
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
($)
|
|
Awards ($)(2)
|
|
(#)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill(3)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
800,000
|
|
|
|
1,258,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,150
|
(4)
|
Chairman and Former
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
776,923
|
|
|
|
1,300,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,615,500
|
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
|
|
5,808,600
|
(5)
|
|
|
3,140
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
726,923
|
(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
6,864,200
|
(7)
|
|
|
3,184
|
|
Arif Shakeel(8)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
757,462
|
|
|
|
1,258,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,812,500
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,930
|
(4)
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
573,077
|
|
|
|
801,375
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,522,450
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
4,149,000
|
(10)
|
|
|
4,201
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
571,154
|
(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
|
4,903,000
|
(11)
|
|
|
3,776
|
|
John F. Coyne(12)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
547,692
|
|
|
|
991,525
|
(13)
|
|
|
106,312
|
(14)
|
|
|
4,731,900
|
(9)
|
|
|
315,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,921
|
(4)
|
President and
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
271,154
|
|
|
|
380,000
|
|
|
|
88,933
|
(14)
|
|
|
1,221,297
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,563
|
|
Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
381,154
|
|
|
|
574,188
|
(15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,390,260
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,331
|
(4)
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
345,385
|
|
|
|
370,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,654,020
|
|
|
|
58,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,260
|
|
Administration, General
Counsel and Secretary
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
324,462
|
(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,000
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
3,308
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam(16)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
400,000
|
|
|
|
521,350
|
(17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,318,603
|
(9)
|
|
|
14,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,475
|
(4)
|
Senior Vice President,
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
328,846
|
|
|
|
387,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
587,004
|
|
|
|
58,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,544
|
|
Chief Technology Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
381,154
|
|
|
|
471,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,318,350
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,653
|
(4)
|
Senior Vice President and
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
345,385
|
|
|
|
405,063
|
(18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,633,600
|
|
|
|
54,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,420
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
307,154
|
(6)
|
|
|
35,000
|
(19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
772,500
|
|
|
|
135,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,436
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
The amount of perquisites and other personal benefits received
by each of the Named Executive Officers for the years indicated
did not exceed the lesser of $50,000 or 10% of the
individuals total annual salary and bonus, which
represents the threshold reporting requirement. |
|
** |
|
We have not historically granted Stock Appreciation Rights. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the amounts disclosed in the Bonus
column for 2006 and 2005 were all awarded under our Incentive
Compensation Plan. |
|
(2) |
|
At the end of fiscal 2006, the aggregate share amount and dollar
value of (i) all unvested restricted stock awards granted
to the Named Executive Officers (which consisted of the unvested
portion of restricted stock awards granted to the Named
Executive Officers in fiscal 2004, 2005 and 2006), and
(ii) all unvested restricted stock unit awards |
80
|
|
|
|
|
granted to the Named Executive Officers (which consisted of the
unvested portion of restricted stock unit awards granted to the
Named Executive Officers in fiscal 2006), were as follows (based
on the $19.81 closing price of our common stock on June 30,
2006): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested Restricted Stock
|
|
|
Unvested Restricted Stock
|
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Unit Awards (*)
|
|
Name
|
|
# Shares
|
|
|
$ Amount
|
|
|
# Units
|
|
|
$ Amount
|
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
|
$
|
9,905,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Arif Shakeel**
|
|
|
1,566,667
|
|
|
|
31,035,673
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
358,425
|
|
|
|
7,100,399
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
594,300
|
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
162,000
|
|
|
|
3,209,220
|
|
|
|
58,000
|
|
|
|
1,148,980
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam
|
|
|
88,473
|
|
|
|
1,752,650
|
|
|
|
26,308
|
|
|
|
521,162
|
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
216,250
|
|
|
|
4,283,913
|
|
|
|
55,000
|
|
|
|
1,089,550
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Each restricted stock unit is a non-voting unit of measurement
that is deemed for bookkeeping purposes to be equivalent to one
outstanding share of our common stock. |
|
** |
|
For Mr. Shakeel, these awards include 90,800 shares of
restricted stock that were scheduled to vest on January 1,
2008. This amount was cancelled on October 31, 2006
pursuant to an amendment to our employment agreement with
Mr. Shakeel. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Mr. Massengill resigned as Chief Executive Officer
effective October 1, 2005. He remains an executive officer
in his capacity as Chairman of our Board of Directors. |
|
(4) |
|
The amounts reported in this column for fiscal 2006 consist of:
(i) our matching contributions to the Western Digital
Corporation 401(k) Plan on behalf of Mr. Massengill
($2,000), Mr. Shakeel ($2,000), Mr. Coyne ($2,000),
Mr. Bukaty ($2,000), Dr. Moghadam ($2,000) and
Mr. Milligan ($2,000); (ii) the dollar value of life
insurance premiums paid by, or on behalf of, us with respect to
term life insurance for the benefit of Mr. Massengill
($2,150), Mr. Shakeel ($3,930), Mr. Coyne ($4,440),
Mr. Bukaty ($2,331), Dr. Moghadam ($7,475) and
Mr. Milligan ($653), (iii) relocation expenses of
$51,654 relating to Mr. Coynes relocation from
Malaysia to the United States, and (iv) $16,827 paid by us
to Mr. Coyne for unused vacation days in accordance with
our vacation policy. |
|
(5) |
|
This amount represents the final annual installment paid to
Mr. Massengill upon the final July 1, 2005 vesting of
share units awarded to him pursuant to his Long-Term
Retention Agreement. The Long-Term Retention Agreement pursuant
to which Mr. Massengill received the share units is
described below under Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(6) |
|
Our 2004 fiscal year included 27 bi-weekly pay periods. |
|
(7) |
|
This amount represents the payment of two annual installments
under a Long-Term Retention Agreement with Mr. Massengill:
the first is a 2003 installment of $3,227,000 and the second is
a 2004 installment of $3,637,200. We are reporting the combined
amount of $6,864,200 in the table as a fiscal 2004 payment
because the annual installment vesting of the share
units underlying the payments occurred on July 1,
2003 and July 1, 2004. Each of these dates was part of
fiscal 2004 because fiscal 2004 commenced June 28, 2003 and
ended July 2, 2004. The Long-Term Retention Agreement
pursuant to which the Mr. Massengill received these share
units is described below under Employment Contracts,
Termination of Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(8) |
|
Our Board of Directors promoted Mr. Shakeel to President
and Chief Executive Officer effective October 1, 2005. He
assumed the sole role of Chief Executive Officer in June 2006
following the promotion of John Coyne to President and Chief
Operating Officer. Prior to October 1, 2005,
Mr. Shakeel served as our President and Chief Operating
Officer. |
|
(9) |
|
We granted these restricted stock and restricted stock unit
awards in fiscal 2006 under our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
and we have valued them in the table as of the date of grant. If
we pay dividends, dividends would be payable on the shares of
restricted stock listed in the table below at the same rate and
time and in the same form in which dividends are payable on
other outstanding shares of our common stock. No dividends would
be payable on the shares of restricted stock units listed in the
table below. The number, value as of the date of grant and
vesting schedules of these restricted stock and restricted stock
unit awards to the Named Executive Officers are as follows: |
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Shares
|
|
|
# Shares
|
|
|
Per
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject to
|
|
|
Subject to
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Date of
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Award
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
Vesting Schedule
|
|
Arif Shakeel*
|
|
|
1,250,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
14.25
|
|
|
500,000 shares vest on
1/1/2007 and the remaining 750,000 shares vest
on 1/1/2008
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
20.13
|
|
|
Vests in full on May 11, 2009
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.76
|
|
|
Vests in equal installments on
November 17, 2006, 2007 and 2008
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,000
|
|
|
|
23.97
|
|
|
Vests in full on August 31,
2008
|
Hossein M. Moghadam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,308
|
|
|
|
23.97
|
|
|
Vests in full on February 16,
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
23.97
|
|
|
Vests in full on August 31,
2008
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.76
|
|
|
Vests in equal installments on
November 17, 2006, 2007 and 2008
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,000
|
|
|
|
23.97
|
|
|
Vests in full on August 31,
2008
|
|
|
|
* |
|
For Mr. Shakeel, this award includes 90,800 shares of
restricted stock that were scheduled to vest on January 1,
2008. This amount was cancelled on October 31, 2006
pursuant to an amendment to our employment agreement with
Mr. Shakeel. Also pursuant to this amendment, the remaining
659,200 shares of restricted stock that were scheduled to vest
on January 1, 2008 will instead vest on June 29, 2007
if Mr. Shakeel is employed by us on that date. |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
This amount represents the final annual installment paid to
Mr. Shakeel upon the final July 1, 2005 vesting of
share units awarded to him pursuant to his Long-Term
Retention Agreement. The Long-Term Retention Agreement pursuant
to which Mr. Shakeel received these share units is
described below under Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(11) |
|
This amount represents the payment of two annual installments
under a Long-Term Retention Agreement with Mr. Shakeel: the
first is a 2003 installment of $2,305,000 and the second is a
2004 installment of $2,598,000. We are reporting the combined
amount of $4,903,000 in the table as a fiscal 2004 payment
because the annual installment vesting of the share
units underlying the payments occurred on July 1,
2003 and July 1, 2004. Each of these dates was part of
fiscal 2004 because fiscal 2004 commenced June 28, 2003 and
ended July 2, 2004. The Long-Term Retention Agreement
pursuant to which Mr. Shakeel received these share units is
described below under Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(12) |
|
Mr. Coyne became an executive officer of Western Digital in
fiscal 2005 and therefore we are providing no information prior
to such year. |
|
(13) |
|
This amount includes a $75,000 retention bonus earned by
Mr. Coyne pursuant to the Long-Term Retention Agreement
described below under Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(14) |
|
Consists of tax equalization payments paid by us on behalf of
Mr. Coyne with respect to his services in Malaysia. |
|
(15) |
|
This amount includes a one-time discretionary bonus of $102,438
paid to Mr. Bukaty. |
|
(16) |
|
Dr. Moghadam became an executive officer of Western Digital
in fiscal 2005 and therefore we are providing no information
prior to such year. |
|
(17) |
|
This amount includes a $112,500 retention bonus earned by
Dr. Moghadam pursuant to the Long-Term Retention Agreement
described below under Employment Contracts, Termination of
Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements. |
|
(18) |
|
This amount includes a $35,000 retention bonus earned by
Mr. Milligan upon completion of twenty-four months of
employment with us. |
|
(19) |
|
This amount consists of a retention bonus earned by
Mr. Milligan upon completion of twelve months of employment
with us. |
82
Option/SAR
Grants in Last Fiscal Year
The following table sets forth information regarding stock
options to purchase shares of our common stock granted to the
Named Executive Officers during fiscal 2006 and the potential
realizable value at certain assumed rates of stock price
appreciation for the option term. These assumed rates are in
accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange
Commission and do not represent our estimate of future stock
price. Actual gains, if any, on stock option exercises will be
dependent on the future performance of our common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual Grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential Realizable
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value at Assumed
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Options/SARs*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Rates of Stock
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Granted to
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price Appreciation for
|
|
|
|
Options/SARs*
|
|
|
Employees in
|
|
|
or Base
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Option Term
|
|
Name
|
|
Granted(1)
|
|
|
Fiscal Year
|
|
|
Price ($/Sh)
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
5% ($)
|
|
|
10% ($)
|
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arif Shakeel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
5.51
|
|
|
|
20.13
|
|
|
|
5/11/2016
|
|
|
|
822,877
|
|
|
|
2,085,332
|
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
21.17
|
|
|
|
13.76
|
|
|
|
11/17/2015
|
|
|
|
2,163,398
|
|
|
|
5,482,474
|
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam
|
|
|
14,017
|
|
|
|
1.19
|
|
|
|
23.97
|
|
|
|
2/16/2016
|
|
|
|
211,301
|
|
|
|
535,478
|
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
We have not historically granted Stock Appreciation Rights. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All of these options to purchase shares of our common stock were
granted under our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan and were
granted at fair market value on the date of grant. Options
become exercisable as to 25% of the total number of shares
granted on the first anniversary of the grant date and 6.25% at
the end of each three-month period thereafter, except that the
option grant to Mr. Coyne covering 250,000 shares of
our common stock vests in three equal annual installments
beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date. All
options have a term of 10 years, subject to earlier
termination in connection with termination of employment. The
Compensation Committee administers the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan and has broad discretion and authority to
construe and interpret the plan. |
Aggregated
Option/SAR Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year-End
Option/SAR Values
The following table sets forth the option exercises by the Named
Executive Officers in fiscal 2006, the number of shares covered
by exercisable and unexercisable options held by the Named
Executive Officers on June 30, 2006, and the aggregate
gains that would have been realized had these options been
exercised on June 30, 2006 even though these options were
not exercised, and the unexercisable options could not have been
exercised, on June 30, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
Value of Unexercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying Unexercised
|
|
|
In-the-Money
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Options/SARs*
|
|
|
Options/SARs*
|
|
|
|
Acquired on
|
|
|
Realized
|
|
|
At Fiscal Year End (#)
|
|
|
At Fiscal Year End ($)(2)
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercise (#)
|
|
|
($)(1)
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill
|
|
|
802,705
|
|
|
|
8,780,071
|
|
|
|
380,900
|
|
|
|
231,250
|
|
|
|
2,119,652
|
|
|
|
2,005,500
|
|
Arif Shakeel
|
|
|
237,500
|
|
|
|
2,798,140
|
|
|
|
40,625
|
|
|
|
156,250
|
(3)
|
|
|
318,500
|
|
|
|
1,321,250
|
(3)
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
52,494
|
|
|
|
597,190
|
|
|
|
66,252
|
|
|
|
375,935
|
|
|
|
224,224
|
|
|
|
2,127,474
|
|
Raymond M. Bukaty
|
|
|
70,200
|
|
|
|
1,246,364
|
|
|
|
138,439
|
|
|
|
69,561
|
|
|
|
1,330,921
|
|
|
|
613,179
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam
|
|
|
60,312
|
|
|
|
396,502
|
|
|
|
28,188
|
|
|
|
73,079
|
|
|
|
355,653
|
|
|
|
599,467
|
|
Stephen D. Milligan
|
|
|
161,532
|
|
|
|
2,525,092
|
|
|
|
28,626
|
|
|
|
85,842
|
|
|
|
338,825
|
|
|
|
823,948
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
We have not historically granted Stock Appreciation Rights. |
83
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We determine this value based on the market value on the date of
exercise of shares covered by the exercised options, less the
option exercise price. |
|
(2) |
|
These amounts represent the difference between the exercise
price of
in-the-money
options and the market price of our common stock on
June 30, 2006, the last trading day of fiscal 2006. The
closing price of our common stock on that day on the New York
Stock Exchange was $19.81. Options are
in-the-money
if the market value of the shares covered thereby is greater
than the option exercise price. |
|
(3) |
|
These amounts include an aggregate of 43,750 shares of
common stock subject to stock options granted to
Mr. Shakeel that were cancelled October 31, 2006
pursuant to an amendment to our employment agreement with
Mr. Shakeel. |
Long-Term
Incentive Plans Awards in Last Fiscal Year
The following table sets forth the dollar value of a long-term
cash award granted to each of Mr. Coyne and
Dr. Moghadam during fiscal 2006. Each long-term cash award
is subject to our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan and a separate
award agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Performance or
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts Under
|
|
|
Shares, Units
|
|
Other Period Until
|
|
Non-Stock Price-Based Plans(1)
|
|
|
or Other
|
|
Maturation or
|
|
Threshold
|
|
Target
|
|
Maximum
|
Name
|
|
Rights (#)(1)
|
|
Payout
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
($)
|
|
John F. Coyne
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7/01/06 - 6/27/08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
1,200,000
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/31/05 - 6/29/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The long-term cash award is valued at a target amount as
determined by the administrator of our 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan and will be payable in cash at the end of the
applicable performance period based upon the achievement of one
or more objective performance goals set forth in the applicable
award agreement. No amount will be payable if minimum
performance levels are not achieved and up to a maximum of 200%
of the target cash award will be payable if performance exceeds
the target level. In the event the recipient ceases to be
employed by us or any of our subsidiaries before the end of the
applicable performance period, the long-term cash award will
terminate, except that in the event of a recipients death,
a pro rata portion of the long-term cash award will be payable
to the recipients legal representative as further provided
in the applicable award agreement. If eligible, each recipient
will be permitted to defer payment of the long-term cash award
covered by his agreement pursuant to our Deferred Compensation
Plan. In addition, subject to certain limitations, 100% of the
target award amount (or such greater percentage as the
Compensation Committee may deem appropriate in the
circumstances) will become payable upon the occurrence of a
change in control event. |
Director
Compensation
Director Fees. Effective January 1, 2006,
non-employee directors receive an annual retainer of $75,000
payable on January 1 of each year, or if they join the Board of
Directors at a later date, they receive a proportion of the
annual fee corresponding to the period for which they serve.
Effective January 1, 2006, the chairman of the Audit
Committee receives an additional annual retainer of $15,000 and
each other member of the Audit Committee receives an additional
annual retainer of $5,000. The chairmen of the Governance
Committee and the Compensation Committee also each receive an
additional annual retainer of $5,000. We provide these
additional annual retainers for directors serving on the Audit
Committee and for the chairmen of the Compensation and
Governance Committees in recognition of the additional work
required for such service. We also reimburse non-employee
directors for reasonable
out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in attending each Board of Directors or
committee meeting; however, beginning January 1, 2006,
non-employee directors do not receive a separate fee for each
Board of Directors or committee meeting they attend.
Prior to January 1, 2006, each non-employee director
received an annual retainer of $40,000 payable in January. Each
non-employee director also received compensation of $2,500 for
each session during which he or she attended a Board of
Directors meeting, $1,500 for any and all committee meetings
attended, $1,250 for each Board of Directors meeting and $750
for each committee meeting held by telephone conference, plus
reimbursement of reasonable
out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in attending each meeting. In addition, the
chairman of each committee of the Board of Directors received an
annual retainer of $5,000.
84
In addition, on August 5, 2005, the Board of Directors
approved the payment of $2,500 per day (or time aggregating
a full work day) for time spent by any independent director
outside of Board of Directors or committee meetings assisting
with specified succession planning matters, resulting in
additional payments aggregating $32,500 to members of our Board
of Directors during fiscal 2006.
Messrs. Massengill, Shakeel and Coyne, who are our
employees, do not receive any additional compensation for their
service on the Board of Directors or any Board of Directors
committee.
Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan. Under our Amended and Restated Non-Employee
Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan, each non-employee director may elect prior to any calendar
year to receive shares in lieu of any or all of (1) the
annual retainer fee(s) otherwise payable to him or her in cash
for that calendar year,
and/or
(2) for calendar years prior to 2006, the meeting
attendance fees otherwise payable to him or her in cash for that
calendar year. We determine the number of shares of common stock
payable to a non-employee director under the Non-Employee
Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan by dividing the amount of the cash fee the director would
have otherwise received by the fair market value of the common
stock on the date the cash fee would have been paid.
At the time of the election for a particular calendar year, we
permit each non-employee director to defer between a minimum of
$2,000 and a maximum of 100% of any cash or stock compensation
to be paid to the director during that calendar year in
accordance with our Deferred Compensation Plan. A deferral will
not change the form (cash or shares) in which the fee is to be
paid at the end of the deferral period. If a director has made
an election pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan to defer common stock in lieu of annual retainer or meeting
fees otherwise payable to the director, deferred stock units
will be credited to the directors deferred compensation
account and such deferred stock units will carry no voting or
dividend rights. For amounts deferred in cash pursuant to our
Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan, each participant may elect one or more measurement funds
to be used to determine additional amounts to be credited to his
or her account balance, including certain mutual funds and a
declared rate fund under which we credit interest at a fixed
rate for each plan year. We set the fixed interest rate prior to
the beginning of the plan year. The fixed interest rate was
5.25% for calendar year 2006, 5.50% for calendar year 2005, and
6.00% for calendar year 2004. Prior to January 1, 2006,
pursuant to the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan, we paid a 25% premium to each non-employee director who
elected to defer annual retainer or meeting fees to be received
in common stock. Effective January 1, 2006, the Board of
Directors has eliminated the payment of this premium.
Non-employee directors have deferred the payment of annual
retainer
and/or
meeting fees pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan and our Deferred Compensation Plan in the last three fiscal
years as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 Deferred
|
|
|
2006 Cash
|
|
|
2005 Deferred
|
|
|
2005 Cash
|
|
|
2004 Deferred
|
|
|
2004 Cash
|
|
Non-Employee Director
|
|
Stock Units
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Stock Units(1)
|
|
|
Deferred(2)
|
|
|
Stock Units(1)
|
|
|
Deferred(2)
|
|
|
Peter D. Behrendt
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
40,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
2,120
|
|
|
$
|
28,750
|
|
Kathleen A. Cote
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,250
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
41,688
|
|
Henry T. DeNero
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William L. Kimsey
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,120
|
|
|
|
23,000
|
|
Michael Lambert
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger H. Moore
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,376
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas E. Pardun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,500
|
|
|
|
2,306
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,120
|
|
|
|
28,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
82,500
|
|
|
|
4,218
|
|
|
$
|
17,250
|
|
|
|
17,736
|
|
|
$
|
122,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes a 25% premium, in the form of shares of our common
stock, that each non-employee director received prior to
January 1, 2006 under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan for any election to defer common stock received in lieu of
annual retainer or meeting fees otherwise payable to the
director. After December 31, 2005, deferrals of common
stock received in lieu of annual retainer or meeting fees are
ineligible for a premium payment. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes a 15% premium, in the form of cash, that each
non-employee director received prior to January 1, 2005
under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan for any election to defer his or her annual retainer or
meeting fees to be received in cash. After December 31,
2004, cash deferrals by non-employee directors are ineligible
for a premium payment. |
85
The aggregate number of shares of common stock issued to our
non-employee directors pursuant to elections under the
Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan in each of the last three fiscal years was:
(1) 3,639 shares in fiscal 2006 that were previously
deferred under the Deferred Compensation Plan,
(2) 15,299 shares in fiscal 2005, which includes
13,454 shares of common stock previously deferred under the
Deferred Compensation Plan, and (3) 3,392 shares in
fiscal 2004. As of November 10, 2006, an aggregate of
161,162 shares representing deferred stock units were
credited to deferred compensation accounts of our non-employee
directors.
We are authorized to issue a maximum of 400,000 shares of
our common stock under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan, subject to adjustments for stock splits and similar
events. The Board of Directors has the power to suspend,
discontinue or, subject to stockholder approval if required by
applicable law or regulation, amend the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan at any time.
Non-Employee Director Option Grant
Program. Pursuant to the Non-Employee Director
Option Grant Program adopted by our Board of Directors under our
2004 Performance Incentive Plan, effective November 17,
2005, we grant each non-employee director upon initial election
or appointment to the Board of Directors an option to purchase a
number of shares of our common stock that produces an
approximate value for the option grant (using a Black-Scholes
valuation as of the time of grant) equal to $300,000 on the
grant date. After a non-employee director joins the Board of
Directors, immediately following each annual meeting of
stockholders if he or she has been re-elected as a director at
that annual meeting, the non-employee director will receive an
option to purchase a number of shares of our common stock that
produces an approximate value for the option grant (using a
Black-Scholes valuation as of the time of grant) equal to
$100,000 on the grant date. Prior to November 17, 2005,
each newly elected or appointed non-employee director
automatically received an option grant covering
75,000 shares of our common stock, and continuing
non-employee directors automatically received an option grant
covering 10,000 shares of our common stock immediately
following each annual meeting of stockholders.
The per-share exercise price of all option grants under the
Non-Employee Director Option Grant Program equals the fair
market value of a share of our common stock on the date of
grant, and the options vest over a period of four years, with
25% vesting on the first anniversary of the grant date and 6.25%
vesting at the end of each three-month period thereafter. In
addition, all option grants under the Non-Employee Director
Option Grant Program will vest only if the optionee has remained
a director for the entire period from the grant date to the
vesting date, unless the director retired after four years of
service, in which case all options immediately vest and shall be
exercised by the director before the earlier of (i) three
years after the directors retirement or (ii) the
expiration of the original term of the option, provided, in each
case, the director has performed at least twelve months of
service for us after the grant of the option and does not render
services to any of our competitors. Shares of common stock that
we may issue upon the exercise of stock options granted under
the Non-Employee Director Option Grant Program are subject to
the applicable share limits specified in our 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan.
Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit Grant
Program. Our Board of Directors has adopted a
Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit Grant Program under
our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan pursuant to which we grant
restricted stock units, or RSUs, to our non-employee directors.
Pursuant to this program, effective as of January 1, 2006,
we award non-employee directors a number of RSUs each January 1
equal in value (based on the fair market value of an equivalent
number of shares of our common stock on the grant date) to
$100,000. We award non-employee directors who are newly elected
or appointed to the Board of Directors after January 1 of a
given year a prorated award of RSUs for that year. Prior to
calendar year 2006, we granted non-employee directors 2,100 RSUs
each January 1 following adoption of the plan through calendar
year 2004 and 4,527 RSUs through calendar year 2005.
All RSUs vest 100% on the third anniversary of the grant.
However, if a director served as a director for at least 48
continuous months when such director ceases to be a director,
all unvested RSUs vest immediately upon the directors
termination, provided that the director has performed at least
twelve months of service for us after the grant of the RSU. If a
director ceases to be a director for any reason (except removal)
prior to meeting the eligibility requirements for accelerated
vesting discussed above, then all of the unvested RSUs granted
in the first twelve months prior to termination terminate
without vesting, 1/3 of all unvested RSUs granted within the
second twelve-month period prior to termination immediately vest
and become payable, and 2/3 of all unvested RSUs granted within
the third twelve-month period prior to termination immediately
vest and become payable. These RSUs are generally paid in an
equal number of shares of our common stock following the vesting
date. If dividends are paid prior to the vesting and payment of
the RSUs, the director
86
is credited with additional RSUs as dividend equivalents that
are subject to the same vesting requirements as the underlying
RSUs. Shares of common stock issued in respect of the
Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit Grant Program are
subject to the applicable share limits specified in our 2004
Performance Incentive Plan.
We also permit non-employee directors to defer receipt of RSUs
payable under the Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit
Grant Program pursuant to our Deferred Compensation Plan.
Employment
Contracts, Termination of Employment and
Change-in-Control
Arrangements
Employment
Arrangements
Mr. Massengill. On August 25, 2005,
we entered into an Employment Agreement with Mr. Massengill
pursuant to which he relinquished the role of Chief Executive
Officer, effective October 1, 2005, and agreed to continue
to serve as Chairman of our Board of Directors or in such other
executive capacity as the Board of Directors may assign.
Mr. Massengills duties as Chairman of the Board
include offering assistance to Mr. Shakeel in his new
position as Chief Executive Officer and coordinating investor
communications.
In accordance with the agreement, Mr. Massengill will
continue to receive base salary at his current annual rate of
$800,000, his target annual bonus under our Incentive
Compensation Plan is 100% of his base salary, and
Mr. Massengill will be entitled to participate in our other
benefit plans on terms consistent with those generally
applicable to our other senior executives. We have cancelled
Mr. Massengills outstanding stock options and shares
of restricted stock, to the extent that such options and shares
of restricted stock were scheduled to vest after July 31,
2007, pursuant to the agreement. Provided that
Mr. Massengill remains employed by us through
January 1, 2007, any of his outstanding stock options and
any of his shares of restricted stock scheduled to vest after
January 1, 2007 and on or before July 31, 2007 will
accelerate and become vested on January 1, 2007. With
respect to the accelerated options, Mr. Massengill will
have until the later of (i) January 1, 2010, or
(ii) the time the options would have otherwise expired or
been terminated in accordance with the termination of employment
rules otherwise applicable to the options (but in no event later
than the expiration date of the options) to exercise the
options. Also pursuant to the agreement, the entire performance
share award granted to Mr. Massengill in January 2005 has
been cancelled.
If we terminate Mr. Massengills employment other than
for cause (as defined in the agreement) prior to January 1,
2007, Mr. Massengill will be entitled to (i) a lump
sum cash payment equal to his base salary and target bonus for
the period between the date his employment terminates and
January 1, 2007, and (ii) accelerated vesting of any
and all options and other equity-based awards then outstanding
and not otherwise fully vested, but only to the extent such
awards were otherwise scheduled to vest on or before
July 31, 2007. The Employment Agreement with
Mr. Massengill expires January 1, 2007, subject to
certain termination provisions.
Mr. Shakeel. On August 25, 2005, we
also entered into an Employment Agreement with Mr. Shakeel
pursuant to which he became President and Chief Executive
Officer on October 1, 2005. We subsequently entered into an
amendment to this agreement with Mr. Shakeel on
October 31, 2006. In accordance with the agreement, as
amended, Mr. Shakeel will serve as our President and Chief
Executive Officer through January 1, 2007 and as a Special
Advisor to the Chief Executive Officer from January 2, 2007
through June 29, 2007. During such period of employment,
Mr. Shakeels annual base salary is $800,000, his
target annual bonus under our Incentive Compensation Plan is
100% of his base salary, and Mr. Shakeel is entitled to
participate in our other benefit plans on terms consistent with
those generally applicable to our other senior executives.
Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Shakeel received an award of
1,250,000 shares of restricted stock on August 25,
2005. An aggregate of 500,000 shares subject to this award
will vest on January 1, 2007. The remaining
750,000 shares subject to this award were scheduled to vest
on January 1, 2008; however, in accordance with the
amendment to Mr. Shakeels Employment Agreement,
90,800 shares subject to this award were cancelled on
October 31, 2006 and the remaining 659,200 shares will
instead now vest in full on June 29, 2007 subject to
Mr. Shakeels employment on that date.
In addition, pursuant to the agreement, we have cancelled
Mr. Shakeels outstanding stock options and shares of
restricted stock effective August 25, 2005 to the extent
that such options and shares of restricted stock were scheduled
to vest after December 31, 2007, as well as the entire
performance share award granted to Mr. Shakeel in January
2005. In accordance with the amendment to
Mr. Shakeels Employment Agreement, on
October 31, 2006, we also cancelled an
87
aggregate of 43,750 shares subject to stock options
previously granted to Mr. Shakeel that were scheduled to
vest after June 29, 2007 and before January 1, 2008.
If we terminate Mr. Shakeels employment other than
for cause (as defined in the agreement) prior to June 29,
2007, Mr. Shakeel will be entitled to (i) a lump sum
cash payment equal to his base salary and target bonus for the
period between the date his employment terminates and
June 29, 2007, and (ii) accelerated vesting of any and
all options and other equity-based awards then outstanding and
not otherwise fully vested, but only to the extent such awards
were otherwise scheduled to vest before June 29, 2007. The
Employment Agreement with Mr. Shakeel, as amended, expires
June 29, 2007, subject to certain termination provisions.
Mr. Coyne. On October 31, 2006, we
entered into an Employment Agreement with Mr. Coyne
pursuant to which he will be become Chief Executive Officer
while also retaining his current title as President. In
accordance with the agreement, effective January 2, 2007,
Mr. Coynes annual base salary will increase to
$800,000, his target annual bonus under our Incentive
Compensation Plan will increase to 100% of his base salary and
he will be entitled to participate in our other benefit plans on
terms consistent with those generally applicable to our other
senior executives.
Pursuant to the agreement, Mr. Coyne also received two
long-term performance cash awards, each that provide for a cash
bonus opportunity with a target amount of $1,000,000. One cash
award corresponds to the performance period July 1, 2006
through June 29, 2007 and the other cash award corresponds
to the performance period July 1, 2006 through
June 27, 2008. The performance cash awards are each subject
to performance objectives determined by our Compensation
Committee. In addition, each year during Mr. Coynes
employment as President and Chief Executive Officer commencing
after the first day of fiscal year 2008, Mr. Coyne will be
eligible for and will receive a performance cash award with a
target amount of no less than $2,000,000. Each such performance
cash award will be based on a
24-month
performance cycle.
Subject to Mr. Coynes employment as President and
Chief Executive Officer on January 31, 2007, the agreement
also provides that Mr. Coyne will receive 1,100,000
restricted stock units under our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
on January 31, 2007. Subject to Mr. Coynes
employment by us, these units will vest and become payable as
follows: 110,000 on January 1, 2008, 110,000 on
January 1, 2009, 330,000 on January 1, 2010, 110,000
on January 1, 2011 and 440,000 on January 1, 2012.
Also on January 31, 2007, Mr. Coyne will receive a
stock option under our 2004 Performance Incentive Plan to
purchase 120,000 shares of our common stock (subject to
proportionate and equitable adjustments for stock splits and
similar changes in capitalization). The exercise price per share
of the option will equal the fair market value of a share of our
common stock on the grant date of the option. If we are in a
trading blackout period on January 31, 2007 pursuant to our
policies on trading company securities applicable to executive
officers generally, our Compensation Committee may, in its
discretion, delay the effective date of grant of either or both
of the restricted stock unit award or the stock option until
after the blackout period ends, in which case the grant of these
awards will be made effective by approval of our Compensation
Committee promptly following the end of the blackout period (and
the date of the option will be the date of this approval).
In addition, pursuant to the agreement, in each of our four
fiscal years commencing with fiscal year 2008, Mr. Coyne
will receive a stock option to purchase shares of our common
stock. The number of shares subject to these stock options will
be determined in the good faith discretion of our Compensation
Committee based on Mr. Coynes individual performance,
our performance and market benchmark comparisons of compensation
data for chief executive officers against both peer group and
general industry survey data.
If we terminate Mr. Coynes employment prior to
January 1, 2012 other than for cause (as defined in the
agreement) or Mr. Coynes death or disability,
Mr. Coyne will be entitled to the Tier 1 benefits
under our Executive Severance Plan or, if applicable, the
benefits under our Amended and Restated Change of Control
Severance Plan and payment of certain other accrued obligations,
including annual base salary and vacation accrued through
Mr. Coynes termination date.
In the event Mr. Coyne remains employed by us as President
and Chief Executive Officer through January 1, 2012, then
upon Mr. Coynes termination for any reason other than
cause, all stock options granted to Mr. Coyne during the
term of his employment agreement will become fully vested and
Mr. Coyne will have three years to exercise the options,
subject to their earlier expiration. In addition, Mr. Coyne
will be eligible to receive payout following the end of each
performance period subject to any outstanding performance cash
award on a pro-rata basis based on the period of
88
Mr. Coynes employment by us during the applicable
performance period. The Employment Agreement with Mr. Coyne
expires January 1, 2012, subject to certain termination
provisions.
Long-Term
Retention Agreements
Mr. Massengill and Mr. Shakeel. We
entered into Amended and Restated Long-Term Retention Agreements
with each of Mr. Massengill and Mr. Shakeel, effective
December 20, 2002, amending and restating prior long-term
retention agreements with each of them. The Long-Term Retention
Agreements were intended to add incentives for the executives to
advance our long-term interests. Pursuant to the Long-Term
Retention Agreements, our Board of Directors granted
Mr. Massengill and Mr. Shakeel 1.4 million and
1.0 million share units, respectively, subject
to certain adjustment, vesting, forfeiture and repayment
provisions. The share units vested in three installments: 25%
vested on July 1, 2003, 30% vested on July 1, 2004 and
45% vested on July 1, 2005. Within fifteen days of each
vesting period, we paid each executive a cash amount equal to
the product of the number of share units that vested and the
average closing price of our common stock for the preceding
forty-five day period, but in no event more than $9.22 per
share unit. The share units granted to each of the
executives have fully vested and, therefore, no further payments
will be made to Mr. Massengill or Mr. Shakeel pursuant
to these agreements. We have further detailed the amounts paid
to each executive under Executive Compensation
Summary Compensation Table on page 80.
Mr. Coyne and
Dr. Moghadam. Effective as of
September 21, 2004, we entered into Long-Term Retention
Agreements with each of Mr. Coyne and Dr. Moghadam for
the purpose of giving each of them an added incentive to advance
our interests. Pursuant to these agreements, Mr. Coyne
received a cash award in the amount of $300,000 and
Dr. Moghadam received a cash award in the amount of
$450,000. Each award vested and became payable 25% on
September 1, 2005 and 30% on September 1, 2006 and the
remaining 45% will vest and become payable on September 1,
2007, subject to each executives continued employment with
us. In the event of certain corporate changes (as described in
the agreements and including our liquidation or a merger,
reorganization or consolidation with another company in which we
are not the surviving corporation and the surviving corporation
does not assume the award or agree to issue a substitute award
in its place) or certain terminations of the executives
termination of employment upon a change of control (as defined
in the agreement), any unvested portion of the cash award will
vest in full and be payable to the executive. Further, in the
event that the executives employment with us terminates
due to his death, the next installment of the cash award
scheduled to vest will immediately vest and become payable and
all other unvested portions of the cash award will be forfeited.
Executive
Severance Plan
On February 16, 2006, our Board of Directors adopted an
Executive Severance Plan. Participants in the Executive
Severance Plan include certain of our senior management who are
not otherwise currently party to a written employment agreement
(other than an agreement providing for at-will employment and
for no specified term) and who our Board of Directors or
Compensation Committee has designated as a Tier 1
Executive, Tier 2 Executive or Tier 3 Executive. The
Compensation Committee has designated each of Mr. Coyne,
Mr. Bukaty, Dr. Moghadam and Mr. Milligan as
Tier 1 Executives under the Executive Severance Plan.
Mr. Massengill and Mr. Shakeel are not eligible to
participate in the Executive Severance Plan.
The Executive Severance Plan provides that a participant will
receive the following severance benefits in the event of
termination of employment without cause (as defined in the
Executive Severance Plan):
(1) a lump sum severance payment equal to the
participants monthly base salary minus applicable taxes
over a number of months ranging from 12 months to
24 months depending upon the participants status as a
Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3 Executive;
(2) a lump sum pro-rata bonus payment minus applicable
taxes under our bonus program for the bonus cycle in which the
participants termination date occurs (determined based on
the number of days in the applicable bonus cycle during which
the participant was employed (not to exceed six months) and
assuming we meet 100% of the performance target(s) subject to
the bonus award regardless of actual funding by us);
(3) acceleration of the vesting of the participants
then outstanding stock options and restricted stock or stock
unit awards that are subject to time-based vesting requirements
to the extent such stock options and restricted stock
89
or stock units awards would have vested and become exercisable
or payable, as applicable, if the participant had remained
employed for an additional six months;
(4) outplacement services provided by a vendor chosen by us
and at our expense for 12 months following the
participants termination of employment; and
(5) payment by us of applicable COBRA premium payments
following expiration of the participants company-provided
medical, dental
and/or
vision coverage existing as of the participants
termination date for a number of months ranging from
12 months to 24 months depending upon the
participants status as a Tier 1, Tier 2 or
Tier 3 Executive, unless and until the participant
otherwise becomes eligible for equivalent coverage under another
employers plan.
Payment of severance benefits under the Executive Severance Plan
is conditioned upon the participants execution of a valid
and effective release. In addition, no participant is entitled
to a duplication of benefits under the Executive Severance Plan
or any other severance plan of ours or our subsidiaries.
Change
of Control Severance Plan
Effective March 29, 2001, our Board of Directors adopted a
Change of Control Severance Plan covering certain of our
executives and our subsidiaries executives, including each
of the currently employed Named Executive Officers. The Change
of Control Severance Plan provides for payment of severance
benefits to each participating executive officer in the event of
termination of his or her employment in connection with a change
of control of Western Digital. The plan provides for two levels
of severance benefits. The severance benefits are payable if we
or our subsidiaries terminate the employment of the executive
officer without cause or the employee voluntarily terminates his
or her employment for good reason (generally consisting of
adverse changes in responsibilities, compensation, benefits or
location of work place, or breach of the plan by us or any
successor) within one year after a change of control or prior to
and in connection with, or in anticipation of, such a change.
The plan was amended in February 2006 to extend its term until
March 29, 2011.
For each of the Named Executive Officers and certain other
officers subject to Section 16 of the Securities Exchange
Act, the severance benefits generally consist of the following:
(1) a lump sum payment equal to two times the
officers annual base compensation plus the target bonus as
in effect immediately prior to the change in control or as in
effect on the date of notice of termination of the executive
officers employment with us, whichever is higher;
(2) 100% vesting of any unvested stock options granted to
the officer by us;
(3) extension of the period during which the officer may
exercise his or her stock options to the longer of
(a) 90 days after the date of termination of his or
her employment and (b) the period specified in the plan or
agreement governing the options;
(4) continuation for a period of 24 months of the same
or equivalent life, health, hospitalization, dental and
disability insurance coverage and other employee insurance or
welfare benefits, including equivalent coverage for the
officers spouse and dependent children, and a car
allowance equal to what the officer was receiving immediately
prior to the change in control, or a lump sum payment equal to
the cost of obtaining coverage for 24 months if the officer
is ineligible to be covered under the terms of our insurance and
welfare benefit plans;
(5) a lump sum payment equal to the amount of in-lieu
payments that the officer would have been entitled to receive
during the 24 months after termination of his or her
employment if prior to the change in control, the officer was
receiving any
cash-in-lieu
payments designed to enable the officer to obtain insurance
coverage of his or her choosing; and
(6) acceleration of all awards granted to the officer under
our Executive Retention Plan adopted in 1998 or any similar plan.
Any health and welfare benefits will be reduced to the extent of
the receipt of substantially equivalent coverage by the officer
from any successor employer. Generally, the benefits will be
increased to the extent the officer has to pay taxes associated
with excess parachute payments under the Internal
Revenue Code, such that the net amount received by the officer
is equal to the total payments he or she would have received had
the tax not been incurred.
90
Stock
Incentive Plans and Deferred Compensation Plan
Subject to certain conditions or restrictions as described in
our stock incentive plans, these stock incentive plans generally
provide for the acceleration of the vesting of awards granted
thereunder in the event of certain change of control events
described in the plans. In these circumstances, each option may
become immediately exercisable and each restricted stock or
stock unit award may immediately vest. Further, under our
Deferred Compensation Plan, in the event of certain change of
control events described in the plan, contribution and deferral
amounts will immediately vest (to the extent unvested) and will
become payable to the participants as provided in the plan.
Broad-Based
Stock Incentive Plan
On September 30, 1999, our Board of Directors approved the
Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan under which options to purchase
2,578,753 shares of our common stock were outstanding as of
June 30, 2006 and 220,956 shares of restricted stock
remained unvested as of June 30, 2006. This plan was
intended to qualify as broadly-based under the New
York Stock Exchange stockholder approval policy at the time of
its adoption and was not submitted to our stockholders for
approval. Following approval of the 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan by our stockholders in November 2004, no new awards are
permitted under the Broad-Based Incentive Plan after such date
and, therefore, no shares remain available for grant under the
plan.
None of the stock options that we granted under the plan are
incentive stock options under Section 422 of the Internal
Revenue Code and the term of each outstanding option granted
under the plan will not exceed ten years from the date of its
grant. All unvested shares of restricted common stock that we
awarded under the plan are subject to time-based vesting
requirements. All of such shares of restricted stock will vest
on or before September 21, 2008 unless such shares are
earlier forfeited as required by the plan or by an agreement
evidencing the award made under the plan.
The Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors administers
the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan. The committee has broad
discretionary authority to construe and interpret the plan. The
committee may in its discretion provide financing to a
participant in a principal amount sufficient to pay the purchase
price of any award
and/or to
pay the amount of taxes required by law to be withheld with
respect to any award. Any such loan must be subject to all
applicable legal requirements and restrictions pertinent
thereto. Further, the committee may, through the terms of the
award or otherwise, provide for lapse of restrictions on an
option or restricted stock award, either immediately upon a
change of control of Western Digital (as defined in the plan),
or upon termination of the eligible employees employment
within 24 months following a change of control. The
committee may also provide for the exercise, payment or lapse of
restrictions on an award that is only effective if no provision
is made in the change of control transaction.
The Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee, subject to
rules of the New York Stock Exchange requiring stockholder
approval, may amend, alter or discontinue agreements evidencing
an award made under the plan. These amendments may include:
(i) reducing the exercise price of outstanding options; or
(ii) after the date of a change of control, impairing the
rights of any award holder, without such holders consent,
under any award granted prior to the date of any change of
control. No award, or any interest in an award may be
transferred in any manner, other than by will or the laws of
descent and distribution, unless the agreement evidencing an
award expressly states that it is transferable.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
During fiscal 2006, the Compensation Committee consisted of
Messrs. Behrendt, Lambert and Moore. All members of the
Compensation Committee during fiscal 2006 were independent
directors and none of them were our employees or former
employees or had any relationship with us requiring disclosure
under rules of the Securities Exchange Commission requiring
disclosure of certain relationships and related party
transactions. There are no Compensation Committee interlocks
between us and other entities in which one of our executive
officers served on the compensation committee (or equivalent) or
the board of directors of another entity whose executive
officer(s) served on our Compensation Committee or Board of
Directors.
91
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
Security
Ownership by Principal Stockholders and Management
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the
beneficial ownership of our common stock, as of
November 10, 2006, by (1) each person known by us to
own beneficially more than 5% of our outstanding common stock,
(2) each director and each nominee for election as a member
of our Board of Directors, (3) each of the executive
officers named in the Summary Compensation Table below, and
(4) all current directors and executive officers as a
group. This table is based on information supplied to us by our
executive officers, directors and principal stockholders or
included in a Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nature of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beneficial
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
Beneficial Owner
|
|
Ownership(1)
|
|
|
Class(2)
|
|
|
Greater than 5%
Stockholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barclays Global Investors, NA.,
and certain affiliates
|
|
|
22,089,179
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
45 Fremont Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs Asset Management,
L.P.
|
|
|
20,424,813
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
%
|
32 Old Slip, New York, NY 10005(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FMR Corp.
|
|
|
17,850,940
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
82 Devonshire Street, Boston, MA
02109(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LSV Asset Management
|
|
|
11,295,428
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
%
|
1 N. Wacker Drive,
Suite 4000, Chicago, IL 60606(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mellon Financial Corporation
|
|
|
11,117,862
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
%
|
One Mellon Center, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15258(7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter D. Behrendt(8)(9)
|
|
|
93,645
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Kathleen A. Cote(8)
|
|
|
25,625
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Henry T. DeNero(8)
|
|
|
49,166
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
William L. Kimsey(8)
|
|
|
26,875
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Michael D. Lambert(8)
|
|
|
57,125
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Roger H. Moore(8)
|
|
|
45,625
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Thomas E. Pardun(8)(10)
|
|
|
65,625
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew E. Massengill(11)(12)
|
|
|
1,171,608
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Arif Shakeel(11)(12)
|
|
|
1,597,381
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
John F. Coyne(11)(12)
|
|
|
504,971
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Raymond M. Bukaty(12)
|
|
|
332,267
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Stephen D. Milligan(12)
|
|
|
291,139
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Hossein M. Moghadam(12)
|
|
|
141,056
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
All Directors and Executive
Officers as a group (13 persons)(13)
|
|
|
4,402,108
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Represents less than 1% of the outstanding shares of our common
stock. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We determine beneficial ownership in accordance with the rules
of the Securities and Exchange Commission. We deem shares
subject to options currently exercisable or exercisable within
60 days after November 10, 2006 outstanding for
computing the share amount and the percentage ownership of the
person holding such stock options, but we do not deem them
outstanding for purposes of computing the percentage ownership
of any other person. |
92
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Except as otherwise noted below, we determine applicable
percentage ownership on 221,664,618 shares of our common
stock outstanding as of November 10, 2006. |
|
(3) |
|
Beneficial and percentage ownership information is based on
information contained in a Schedule 13G/A filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 10, 2006 by
Barclays Global Investors, NA., and certain affiliates. |
|
(4) |
|
Beneficial and percentage ownership information is based on
information contained in Amendment No. 1 to
Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 3, 2006 by Goldman Sachs Asset
Management, L.P. |
|
(5) |
|
We determine beneficial and percentage ownership information on
information contained in Amendment No. 4 to
Schedule 13G filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 14, 2006 by FMR Corp. and Edward C.
Johnson III. According to the schedule, Fidelity
Management & Research Company (a wholly owned
subsidiary of FMR Corp.) beneficially owns
16,041,310 shares, representing 7.2% of our outstanding
common stock. The schedule also discloses that members of
Mr. Johnsons family are the predominant owners of
Class B shares of FMR Corp., representing 49% of the voting
power of FMR Corp., and all Class B shareholders have
entered into a shareholders agreement under which their
shares will be voted in accordance with the majority vote of
Class B shares. As such, members of Mr. Johnsons
family may be deemed to be members of a controlling group with
respect to FMR Corp. Additionally, the schedule discloses that a
partnership controlled predominantly by members of
Mr. Johnsons family has the power to vote
approximately 38% of the total voting stock of Fidelity
International Limited, or FIL. FMR Corp. and FIL are of the
view, however, that they are not acting as a group and that they
are not otherwise required to attribute beneficial ownership of
our common stock to one another. |
|
(6) |
|
Beneficial and percentage ownership information on information
is based contained in a Schedule 13G filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 13, 2006 by
LSV Asset Management. |
|
(7) |
|
Beneficial and percentage ownership information is based on
information contained in a Schedule 13G filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 15, 2006 by
Mellon Financial Corporation. |
|
(8) |
|
Includes shares of our common stock that may be acquired within
60 days after November 10, 2006 through the exercise
of stock options as follows: Mr. Behrendt (68,125),
Ms. Cote (25,625), Mr. DeNero (45,625),
Mr. Kimsey (26,875), Mr. Lambert (50,625),
Mr. Moore (45,625), and Mr. Pardun (60,625). Does not
include shares representing deferred stock units credited to
accounts in our Deferred Compensation Plan as of
November 10, 2006, as to which participants currently have
no voting or investment power, as follows: Mr. Behrendt
(2,120), Ms. Cote (31,309), Mr. DeNero (45,487),
Mr. Kimsey (4,828), Mr. Moore (57,567), and
Mr. Pardun (19,851). |
|
(9) |
|
Includes 750 shares of our common stock held by
Mr. Behrendts children. |
|
(10) |
|
Includes 5,000 shares of our common stock held in a family
trust. |
|
(11) |
|
Messrs. Massengill, Shakeel and Coyne are also members of
our Board of Directors. |
|
(12) |
|
Includes shares of our common stock that may be acquired within
60 days after November 10, 2006 through the exercise
of stock options as follows: Mr. Massengill (612,150),
Mr. Shakeel (96,875), Mr. Coyne (128,021),
Mr. Bukaty (156,314), Mr. Milligan (58,782) and
Dr. Moghadam (46,375). |
|
(13) |
|
Includes 1,421,642 shares of our common stock that may be
acquired within 60 days after November 10, 2006
through the exercise of stock options by our directors and each
of our executive officers. Does not include 161,162 shares
of our common stock representing deferred stock units as
described in footnote 8 above. |
93
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The following table gives information with respect to our equity
compensation plans as of June 30, 2006, which plans were as
follows: Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan, 2004 Performance Incentive Plan, Employee Stock Option
Plan, Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan, Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors and 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan.
With the exception of the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan,
these plans have each been approved by our stockholders.
Following expiration of the Employee Stock Option Plan on
November 10, 2004 and approval of the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan by our stockholders on November 18, 2004, no
new awards are permitted under the Employee Stock Option Plan,
the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan and the Stock Option Plan
for Non-Employee Directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Available for
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities to be
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Future Issuance Under
|
|
|
|
Issued Upon Exercise of
|
|
|
Exercise Price of
|
|
|
Equity Compensation Plans
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
(Excluding Securities
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
Reflected in Column(a))
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved
by security holders
|
|
|
10,002,156
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
12.1823
|
(2)
|
|
|
18,865,108
|
(3)
|
Equity compensation plans not
approved by security holders
|
|
|
2,578,753
|
(4)
|
|
|
4.8123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12,580,909
|
|
|
$
|
10.6520
|
|
|
|
18,865,108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Of these shares, as of June 30, 2006, 2,581,540 were
subject to stock options outstanding under the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan, 6,951,017 were subject to stock options
outstanding under the Employee Stock Option Plan, 308,437 were
subject to stock options outstanding under the Stock Option Plan
for Non-Employee Directors, and 161,162 were subject to deferred
stock units credited under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan that will be paid in an equivalent number of shares. In
addition, this amount does not include an aggregate of
3,340,920 shares of restricted stock and restricted stock
unit awards that were unvested as of June 30, 2006 under
the 2004 Performance Incentive Plan and will vest through
September 30, 2009. |
|
(2) |
|
This number reflects the weighted-average exercise price of
outstanding options and has been calculated exclusive of
deferred stock units credited under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan. |
|
(3) |
|
Of these shares, as of June 30, 2006, 14,244,266 remained
available for future issuance under the 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan, 150,218 remained available for future issuance
under the Non-Employee Directors
Stock-for-Fees
Plan and 4,470,624 remained available for future issuance under
the 2005 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. |
|
(4) |
|
Does not include an aggregate of 220,956 shares of
restricted stock outstanding and unvested as of June 30,
2006 under the Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan that will vest
through September 21, 2008. |
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions
|
None.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The accounting firm of KPMG LLP, certified public accountants,
has served as our independent accountants since our
incorporation in 1970. The Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors has again appointed KPMG to serve as our independent
accountants for the fiscal year ending June 29, 2007.
94
Following are the fees paid by us to KPMG for the fiscal years
ended June 30, 2006 and July 1, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description of Professional Service
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Audit
Fees
professional services rendered for the audit of our annual
financial statements and the reviews of the financial statements
included in our
Form 10-Qs
|
|
$
|
1,852,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,532,000
|
|
Audit-Related
Fees
assurance and related services reasonably related to the
performance of the audit or review of our financial statements(1)
|
|
|
41,000
|
|
|
|
98,000
|
|
Tax
Fees
professional services rendered for tax compliance, tax advice
and tax planning(2)
|
|
|
291,000
|
|
|
|
262,000
|
|
All Other
Fees
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Audit-Related Fees billed in fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005
consisted of audits of our distributors, accounting assistance
to our subsidiaries, and audits performed in connection with the
Western Digital Corporation 401(k) Plan. |
|
(2) |
|
Tax Fees in fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005 consisted of tax
compliance assistance and related services and transfer pricing
review. |
The Audit Committee has adopted a policy regarding the
pre-approval of audit and non-audit services to be provided by
our independent accountants. The policy requires that KPMG LLP
seek pre-approval by the Audit Committee of all audit and
permissible non-audit services by providing a description of the
services to be performed and specific fee estimates for each
such service. The Audit Committee has delegated to the Chairman
of the Audit Committee the authority to pre-approve
audit-related and permissible non-audit services and associated
fees up to a maximum for any one audit-related or non-audit
service of US$50,000, provided that the Chairman shall report
any decisions to pre-approve such audit-related or non-audit
services and fees to the full Audit Committee at its next
regular meeting for ratification. One-hundred percent (100%) of
the Audit-Related Fees and Tax Fees billed by KPMG during fiscal
2006 and fiscal 2005 were approved by the Audit Committee
pursuant to regulations of the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
95
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) Documents filed as a part of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K:
(1) Financial Statements
The financial statements included in Part II, Item 8
of this document are filed as part of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
The financial statement schedule included in Part II,
Item 8 of this document is filed as part of this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
All other schedules are omitted as the required information is
inapplicable or the information is presented in the consolidated
financial statements or related Notes.
Separate financial statements have been omitted as we are
primarily an operating company and our subsidiaries are wholly
or majority owned and do not have minority equity interests
and/or
indebtedness to any person other than us in amounts which
together exceed 5% of the total consolidated assets as shown by
the most recent year-end consolidated balance sheet.
(3) Exhibits
The following exhibits are filed herewith or are incorporated by
reference, as specified below, from exhibits previously filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We shall furnish
copies of exhibits for a reasonable fee (covering the expense of
furnishing copies) upon written request to our Secretary at our
principal executive offices.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement between
Chapter 7 Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Read-Rite
Corporation and RR (US) Acquisition Corporation, dated
July 24, 2003, including Option Agreements to purchase all
of the outstanding capital stock of Read-Rite International,
Sunward Technologies International, and Read Rite Holding
Company(14)
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation of Western Digital Corporation, as amended to
date(26)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of
Western Digital Corporation, as amended effective as of
May 10, 2006(29)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Rights Agreement between Western
Digital Corporation and American Stock Transfer & Trust
Company, as Rights Agent, dated as of April 6, 2001, which
includes as Exhibit A thereto the Form of Right Certificate
to be distributed to holders of Rights after the Distribution
Date (as that term is defined in the Rights Agreement)(7)
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
Form of Common Stock Certificate(1)
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Certificate of Designations of
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of Western
Digital Corporation, dated April 6, 2001(7)
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan, effective
as of November 17, 2005(25)*
|
|
10
|
.1.1
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement Executives, under the
Western Digital Corporation 2004 Performance Incentive Plan(29)*
|
|
10
|
.1.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Agreement
Executives, under the Western Digital Corporation 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(18)*
|
|
10
|
.1.3
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
Non-Employee Director Option Grant Program, effective as of
November 17, 2005, and Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement Non-Employee
Directors
|
|
10
|
.1.4
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Performance Share Awards and Performance Share Award Agreement
under the Western Digital Corporation 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(20)*
|
|
10
|
.1.5
|
|
Form of Notice of Stock Option
Grant and Stock Option Agreement Non-Executives,
under the Western Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(29)*
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.1.6
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock
Agreement Non-Executives, under the Western
Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan(18)*
|
|
10
|
.1.7
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement Executives,
under the Western Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.8
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.9
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Long-Term Cash Award and Long-Term Cash Award
Agreement Executives, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.10
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Long-Term Cash Award and Long-Term Cash Award
Agreement Employees, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Employee Stock Option Plan, as amended on
November 5, 1998(3)*
|
|
10
|
.2.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Employee Stock Option Plan, dated
April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.2.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Options and Stock Option Agreement under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated Employee Stock Option Plan as
amended(22)*
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan(5)*
|
|
10
|
.3.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan, dated
April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.3.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Agreement under the
Western Digital Corporation Broad Based Stock Incentive Plan as
amended(22)*
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee
Directors, effective as of May 25, 2000(8)
|
|
10
|
.4.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors, dated April 6, 2001(8)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Western Digital Corporation 2005
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, effective as of November 17,
2005(25)*
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Amended and Restated Western
Digital Corporation Non-Employee Directors
Stock-For-Fees
Plan, effective as of November 17, 2005(26)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit Grant Program, as
amended November 9, 2006
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Incentive Compensation Plan(9)*
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Summary of Compensation Arrangements for Named Executive
Officers and Directors*
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Amended and Restated Deferred
Compensation Plan, effective March 28, 2003(13)*
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Amended and Restated Executive
Bonus Plan, effective March 28, 2003(13)*
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Amended and Restated 401(k) Plan,
adopted as of March 28, 2002(10)*
|
|
10
|
.12.1
|
|
First Amendment to Western Digital
Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of July 1, 2002(12)*
|
|
10
|
.12.2
|
|
Second Amendment to Western
Digital Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of March 28,
2005(28)*
|
|
10
|
.12.3
|
|
Third Amendment to Western Digital
Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of March 31, 2006(28)*
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Executive Retention Plan(2)*
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
August 25, 2005 between Western Digital Corporation and
Matthew E. Massengill(23)*
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Employment Agreement dated as of
August 25, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and
Arif Shakeel(21)*
|
|
10
|
.15.1
|
|
Amendment to Employment Agreement,
dated as of October 31, 2006, between Western Digital
Corporation and Arif Shakeel(30)
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Long-Term Retention
Agreement Cash, between Western Digital Corporation
and Hossein M. Moghadam, dated as of September 21,
2004(22)*
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.16.1
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
Hossein M. Moghadam(28)*
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Letter agreement, dated
September 10, 2004, by and between Western Digital
Technologies, Inc. and Stephen D. Milligan(17)*
|
|
10
|
.17.1
|
|
Letter agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, by and between Western Digital
Corporation and Stephen D. Milligan(28)*
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
May 25, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and John
F. Coyne(25)*
|
|
10
|
.18.1
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
November 17, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and
John F. Coyne(26)*
|
|
10
|
.18.2
|
|
Long-Term Retention
Agreement Cash, between Western Digital Corporation
and John F. Coyne, dated as of September 21, 2004
|
|
10
|
.18.3
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
October 31, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.18.4
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement between Western Digital
Corporation and John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.18.5
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement between Western Digital Corporation
and John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
Raymond M. Bukaty(28)*
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Western Digital Corporation 1999
Employee Severance Plan for U.S. Employees, effective
December 1, 1999(4)*
|
|
10
|
.20.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation 1999 Employee Severance Plan for
U.S. Employees, dated
April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Change of Control Severance Plan, amended
as of February 16, 2006(27)*
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Executive Severance Plan, effective February 16, 2006(27)*
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement for
Directors of Western Digital Corporation(11)
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement for
Officers of Western Digital Corporation(11)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Sublease, dated as of
September 23, 2003, by and between Advanced Logic Research,
Inc. and Western Digital Corporation(17)
|
|
10
|
.25.1
|
|
First Amendment to Sublease, dated
as of September 28, 2005, by and between Advanced Logic
Research, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(24)
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Lease by and between Serrano Jack,
L.L.C. and Western Digital Corporation, dated May 30,
2000(6)
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Standard Industrial/Commercial
Single-Tenant Lease and Addendum No. 1, dated May 1,
2000, between One Morgan, LLC and Western Digital Corporation(16)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated
June 3, 1996, together with First Amendment, between South
Bay/Edenvale Associates and Western Digital Corporation(16)
|
|
10
|
.28.1
|
|
Second Amendment to Lease, dated
as of April 6, 2004, between Trinet Essential Facilities
XXVI, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(20)
|
|
10
|
.28.2
|
|
Third Amendment to Lease, dated as
of March 1, 2005, between Trinet Essential Facilities XXVI,
Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(20)
|
|
10
|
.28.3
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Lease, dated
as of December 21, 2005, between Trinet Essential
Facilities XXVI, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Volume Purchase Agreement, dated
as of June 6, 2005, by and between Komag USA (Malaysia)
Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and Western Digital Technologies,
Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.29.1
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 22, 2005, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.29.2
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of November 29, 2005, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)§
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.29.3
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 31, 2006, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)§
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
Supply Agreement, dated as of
August 17, 2005, by and between Showa Denko K.K. and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.30.1
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Supply
Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2006, by and between Showa
Denko K.K. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.§
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Supply Agreement for the
Fabrication and Purchase of Semiconductor Products, dated
June 13, 2002, among Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., Marvell
Asia Pte. Ltd. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(13)(15)
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement, dated as of September 19, 2003, among Western
Digital Technologies, Inc., the other credit parties identified
therein, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(19)§
|
|
10
|
.32.1
|
|
First Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of September 8, 2004,
among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(22)
|
|
10
|
.32.2
|
|
Second Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of April 22, 2005, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(22)
|
|
10
|
.32.3
|
|
Third Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2005,
by and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A(24)
|
|
10
|
.32.4
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of June 30, 2006, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A
|
|
10
|
.32.5
|
|
Fifth Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of August 25, 2006, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A§
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
Continuing Guaranty, between
Western Digital Corporation and General Electric Capital
Corporation, dated as of April 7, 2001(8)
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
Master Equipment Lease Agreement
dated June 24, 2004 between CIT Technologies Corporation,
doing business as CIT Systems Leasing, and Western Digital
Technologies, Inc.(17)
|
|
21
|
|
|
Subsidiaries of Western Digital
Corporation
|
|
23
|
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Principal
Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Principal
Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed with this report. |
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required
to be filed as an exhibit pursuant to applicable rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|
§ |
|
Certain portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a
confidential treatment request filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Registration
Statement on
Form 8-B,
filed April 13, 1987. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 10, 1998. |
99
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 8, 1999. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 14, 2000. |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 15, 2000. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 28, 2000. |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
April 6, 2001. |
|
(8) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 27, 2001. |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 13, 2001. |
|
(10) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 6, 2002. |
|
(11) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 8, 2002. |
|
(12) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 7, 2003. |
|
(13) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 9, 2003. |
|
(14) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 15, 2003. |
|
(15) |
|
Subject to confidentiality order dated September 5, 2003. |
|
(16) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 23, 2003. |
|
(17) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 14, 2004. |
|
(18) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 23, 2004. |
|
(19) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the
Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 12, 2005. |
|
(20) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 6, 2005. |
|
(21) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 26, 2005. |
|
(22) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 14, 2005. |
|
(23) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 26, 2005. |
|
(24) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 9, 2005. |
|
(25) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 23, 2005. |
|
(26) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 8, 2006. |
100
|
|
|
(27) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 22, 2006. |
|
(28) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 9, 2006. |
|
(29) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 16, 2006. |
|
(30) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 2, 2006. |
101
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused
this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ Stephen
D. Milligan
|
Stephen D. Milligan
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Dated: November 17, 2006
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ Arif
Shakeel
Arif
Shakeel
|
|
Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer), Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
F. Coyne
John
F. Coyne
|
|
President, Chief Operating
Officer, Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Stephen
D. Milligan
Stephen
D. Milligan
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Joseph
R. Carrillo
Joseph
R. Carrillo
|
|
Vice President and Corporate
Controller (Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Matthew
E.
Massengill
Matthew
E. Massengill
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Peter
D. Behrendt
Peter
D. Behrendt
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Kathleen
A. Cote
Kathleen
A. Cote
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Henry
T. DeNero
Henry
T. DeNero
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William
L. Kimsey
William
L. Kimsey
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael
D. Lambert
Michael
D. Lambert
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Roger
H. Moore
Roger
H. Moore
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
E. Pardun
Thomas
E. Pardun
|
|
Director
|
|
November 17, 2006
|
102
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement between
Chapter 7 Trustee for the Bankruptcy Estate of Read-Rite
Corporation and RR (US) Acquisition Corporation, dated
July 24, 2003, including Option Agreements to purchase all
of the outstanding capital stock of Read-Rite International,
Sunward Technologies International, and Read Rite Holding
Company(14)
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation of Western Digital Corporation, as amended to
date(26)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of
Western Digital Corporation, as amended effective as of
May 10, 2006(29)
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
Rights Agreement between Western
Digital Corporation and American Stock Transfer & Trust
Company, as Rights Agent, dated as of April 6, 2001, which
includes as Exhibit A thereto the Form of Right Certificate
to be distributed to holders of Rights after the Distribution
Date (as that term is defined in the Rights Agreement)(7)
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
Form of Common Stock Certificate(1)
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Certificate of Designations of
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of Western
Digital Corporation, dated April 6, 2001(7)
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan, effective
as of November 17, 2005(25)*
|
|
10
|
.1.1
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement Executives, under the
Western Digital Corporation 2004 Performance Incentive Plan(29)*
|
|
10
|
.1.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Agreement
Executives, under the Western Digital Corporation 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(18)*
|
|
10
|
.1.3
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
Non-Employee Director Option Grant Program, effective as of
November 17, 2005, and Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement Non-Employee
Directors(28)
|
|
10
|
.1.4
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Performance Share Awards and Performance Share Award Agreement
under the Western Digital Corporation 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(20)*
|
|
10
|
.1.5
|
|
Form of Notice of Stock Option
Grant and Stock Option Agreement Non-Executives,
under the Western Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(29)*
|
|
10
|
.1.6
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock
Agreement Non-Executives, under the Western
Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance
Incentive Plan(18)*
|
|
10
|
.1.7
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement Executives,
under the Western Digital Corporation Amended and Restated 2004
Performance Incentive Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.8
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.9
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Long-Term Cash Award and Long-Term Cash Award
Agreement Executives, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.1.10
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Long-Term Cash Award and Long-Term Cash Award
Agreement Employees, under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive
Plan(27)*
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Employee Stock Option Plan, as amended on
November 5, 1998(3)*
|
|
10
|
.2.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Employee Stock Option Plan, dated
April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.2.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Options and Stock Option Agreement under the Western Digital
Corporation Amended and Restated Employee Stock Option Plan as
amended(22)*
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan(5)*
|
|
10
|
.3.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Broad-Based Stock Incentive Plan, dated
April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.3.2
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Agreement under the
Western Digital Corporation Broad Based Stock Incentive Plan as
amended(22)*
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan for Non-Employee
Directors, effective as of May 25, 2000(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.4.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors, dated April 6, 2001(8)
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
Western Digital Corporation 2005
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, effective as of November 17,
2005(25)*
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Amended and Restated Western
Digital Corporation Non-Employee Directors
Stock-For-Fees
Plan, effective as of November 17, 2005(26)
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated 2004 Performance Incentive Plan
Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Unit Grant Program, as
amended November 9, 2006
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Incentive Compensation Plan(9)*
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Summary of Compensation Arrangements for Named Executive
Officers and Directors*
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Amended and Restated Deferred
Compensation Plan, effective March 28, 2003(13)*
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Amended and Restated Executive
Bonus Plan, effective March 28, 2003(13)*
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Amended and Restated 401(k) Plan,
adopted as of March 28, 2002(10)*
|
|
10
|
.12.1
|
|
First Amendment to Western Digital
Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of July 1, 2002(12)*
|
|
10
|
.12.2
|
|
Second Amendment to Western
Digital Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of March 28,
2005(28)*
|
|
10
|
.12.3
|
|
Third Amendment to Western Digital
Corporation 401(k) Plan, effective as of March 31, 2006(28)*
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Executive Retention Plan(2)*
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
August 25, 2005 between Western Digital Corporation and
Matthew E. Massengill(23)*
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
Employment Agreement dated as of
August 25, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and
Arif Shakeel(21)*
|
|
10
|
.15.1
|
|
Amendment to Employment Agreement,
dated as of October 31, 2006, between Western Digital
Corporation and Arif Shakeel(30)
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Long-Term Retention
Agreement Cash, between Western Digital Corporation
and Hossein M. Moghadam, dated as of September 21, 2004(22)*
|
|
10
|
.16.1
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
Hossein M. Moghadam(28)*
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
Letter agreement, dated
September 10, 2004, by and between Western Digital
Technologies, Inc. and Stephen D. Milligan(17)*
|
|
10
|
.17.1
|
|
Letter agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, by and between Western Digital
Corporation and Stephen D. Milligan(28)*
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
May 25, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and John
F. Coyne(25)*
|
|
10
|
.18.1
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
November 17, 2005, between Western Digital Corporation and
John F. Coyne(26)*
|
|
10
|
.18.2
|
|
Long-Term Retention
Agreement Cash, between Western Digital Corporation
and John F. Coyne, dated as of September 21, 2004
|
|
10
|
.18.3
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
October 31, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.18.4
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Units and Stock Unit Award Agreement between Western Digital
Corporation and John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.18.5
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option and Option Agreement between Western Digital Corporation
and John Coyne(30)
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Letter Agreement, dated
February 16, 2006, between Western Digital Corporation and
Raymond M. Bukaty(28)*
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
Western Digital Corporation 1999
Employee Severance Plan for U.S. Employees, effective
December 1, 1999(4)*
|
|
10
|
.20.1
|
|
First Amendment to the Western
Digital Corporation 1999 Employee Severance Plan for
U.S. Employees, dated April 6, 2001(8)*
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Amended and Restated Change of Control Severance Plan, amended
as of February 16, 2006(27)*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
Western Digital Corporation
Executive Severance Plan, effective February 16, 2006(27)*
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement for
Directors of Western Digital Corporation(11)
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement for
Officers of Western Digital Corporation(11)
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
Sublease, dated as of
September 23, 2003, by and between Advanced Logic Research,
Inc. and Western Digital Corporation(17)
|
|
10
|
.25.1
|
|
First Amendment to Sublease, dated
as of September 28, 2005, by and between Advanced Logic
Research, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(24)
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
Lease by and between Serrano Jack,
L.L.C. and Western Digital Corporation, dated May 30,
2000(6)
|
|
10
|
.27
|
|
Standard Industrial/Commercial
Single-Tenant Lease and Addendum No. 1, dated May 1,
2000, between One Morgan, LLC and Western Digital Corporation(16)
|
|
10
|
.28
|
|
Lease Agreement, dated
June 3, 1996, together with First Amendment, between South
Bay/Edenvale Associates and Western Digital Corporation(16)
|
|
10
|
.28.1
|
|
Second Amendment to Lease, dated
as of April 6, 2004, between Trinet Essential Facilities
XXVI, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(20)
|
|
10
|
.28.2
|
|
Third Amendment to Lease, dated as
of March 1, 2005, between Trinet Essential Facilities XXVI,
Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(20)
|
|
10
|
.28.3
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Lease, dated
as of December 21, 2005, between Trinet Essential
Facilities XXVI, Inc. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)
|
|
10
|
.29
|
|
Volume Purchase Agreement, dated
as of June 6, 2005, by and between Komag USA (Malaysia)
Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and Western Digital Technologies,
Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.29.1
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 22, 2005, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.29.2
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of November 29, 2005, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)§
|
|
10
|
.29.3
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Volume
Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 31, 2006, by and
between Komag USA (Malaysia) Sdn., Komag, Incorporated, and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(26)§
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
Supply Agreement, dated as of
August 17, 2005, by and between Showa Denko K.K. and
Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(22)§
|
|
10
|
.30.1
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Supply
Agreement, dated as of July 16, 2006, by and between Showa
Denko K.K. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.§
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
Supply Agreement for the
Fabrication and Purchase of Semiconductor Products, dated
June 13, 2002, among Marvell Semiconductor, Inc., Marvell
Asia Pte. Ltd. and Western Digital Technologies, Inc.(13)(15)
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement, dated as of September 19, 2003, among Western
Digital Technologies, Inc., the other credit parties identified
therein, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(19)§
|
|
10
|
.32.1
|
|
First Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of September 8, 2004,
among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(22)
|
|
10
|
.32.2
|
|
Second Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of April 22, 2005, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A.(22)
|
|
10
|
.32.3
|
|
Third Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2005,
by and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A(24)
|
|
10
|
.32.4
|
|
Fourth Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of June 30, 2006, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A
|
|
10
|
.32.5
|
|
Fifth Amendment to Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of August 25, 2006, by
and among Western Digital Technologies, Inc., Western Digital
(Fremont), Inc., the other credit parties and guarantors
thereto, General Electric Capital Corporation and Bank of
America, N.A§
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
Continuing Guaranty, between
Western Digital Corporation and General Electric Capital
Corporation, dated as of April 7, 2001(8)
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
Master Equipment Lease Agreement
dated June 24, 2004 between CIT Technologies Corporation,
doing business as CIT Systems Leasing, and Western Digital
Technologies, Inc.(17)
|
|
21
|
|
|
Subsidiaries of Western Digital
Corporation
|
|
23
|
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Principal
Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Principal
Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed with this report. |
|
* |
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement required
to be filed as an exhibit pursuant to applicable rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|
§ |
|
Certain portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a
confidential treatment request filed separately with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Registration
Statement on
Form 8-B,
filed April 13, 1987. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 10, 1998. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 8, 1999. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 14, 2000. |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 15, 2000. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 28, 2000. |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
April 6, 2001. |
|
(8) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 27, 2001. |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 13, 2001. |
|
(10) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 6, 2002. |
|
(11) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 8, 2002. |
|
(12) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 7, 2003. |
|
(13) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 9, 2003. |
|
(14) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 15, 2003. |
|
(15) |
|
Subject to confidentiality order dated September 5, 2003. |
|
|
|
(16) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 23, 2003. |
|
(17) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 14, 2004. |
|
(18) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 23, 2004. |
|
(19) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the
Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 12, 2005. |
|
(20) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 6, 2005. |
|
(21) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
August 26, 2005. |
|
(22) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
September 14, 2005. |
|
(23) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Amendment No. 1 to the
Companys Current Report on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 26, 2005. |
|
(24) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 9, 2005. |
|
(25) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 23, 2005. |
|
(26) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 8, 2006. |
|
(27) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 22, 2006. |
|
(28) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
(File
No. 1-08703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 9, 2006. |
|
(29) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 16, 2006. |
|
(30) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Companys Current Report
on
Form 8-K
(File
No. 1-8703),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 2, 2006. |