Unassociated Document
As
Filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 8,
2005.
REGISTRATION
NO. 333-122216
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
DC 20549
AMENDMENT
NO. 2
TO
FORM
S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE
SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC. |
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) |
Delaware |
(State
or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or
Organization) |
3629 |
(Primary
Standard Industrial Classification Code Number |
06-0853042 |
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification Number) |
3
Great Pasture Road
Danbury,
Connecticut 06813
(203)
825-6000 |
(Address,
Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area
Code,
of
Registrant’s Principal Executive Offices) |
Jerry
D. Leitman
President
FuelCell
Energy, Inc.
3
Great Pasture Road
Danbury,
Connecticut 06813
(203)
825-6000 |
(Name,
Address, Including Zip Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of
Agent for Service) |
Copies
of All Communications to:
Richard
A. Krantz, Esq.
Robinson
& Cole LLP
Financial
Centre
695
East Main Street
Stamford,
Connecticut 06904
(203)
462-7500
Approximate
Date of Commencement of Proposed Sale to the Public: Promptly after the
effective date of this registration statement.
If
any of the securities being registered on this form are to be offered on a
delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of
1933, check the following box. x.
If
this form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to
Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the
Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same offering. o
If
this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the
Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If
this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the
Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If
delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434, check
the following box. o
CALCULATION
OF REGISTRATION FEE
Title
of Each Class of Securities
to
Be Registered |
Amount
To
Be
Registered |
Proposed
Maximum
Offering
Price
Per Share(1
) |
Proposed
Maximum
Aggregate
Offering
Price(1) |
Amount
of
Registration
Fee |
Common
Stock |
1,800,000 |
$8.90 |
$16,020,000 |
$1,885.55(2)
|
(1)
Estimated
solely for the purpose of calculating the registration fee pursuant to Rule
457(c) under the Securities Act of 1933 based upon the average of the high and
low prices of the common stock of the Registrant as reported by the Nasdaq
National Market on January 19, 2005.
(2)
Previously
paid.
The
Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as
may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a
further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement
shall become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities
Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such
date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may
determine.
THE
INFORMATION IN THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT COMPLETE AND MAY BE CHANGED. THESE
SECURITIES MAY NOT BE SOLD UNTIL THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT FILED WITH THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION IS EFFECTIVE. THIS PROSPECTUS IS NOT AN OFFER
TO SELL THESE SECURITIES AND IT IS NOT SOLICITING AN OFFER TO BUY THESE
SECURITIES IN ANY STATE WHERE THE OFFER OR SALE IS NOT PERMITTED.
SUBJECT
TO COMPLETION, DATED APRIL [__], 2005
PROSPECTUS
[LOGO]
1,800,000 Shares
of Common Stock
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. is filing this prospectus in connection with:
•
our issuance of up to 300,000 shares of our common stock to certain of our
employees as partial payment of annual bonuses earned with respect to our fiscal
year ended October 31, 2004 and future periods; and
•
our offer and sale of up to 1,500,000 shares of our common stock, the proceeds
of which will be used to pay dividends to holders of our 5% Series B Cumulative
Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (“Series B preferred stock”) for each of
the eight quarterly periods ending on May 15, August 15 and November 15, 2005,
February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15, 2006, and February 15, 2007. A
holder of our Series B preferred stock may alternatively elect to receive as
payment of dividends shares of our common stock in lieu of the proceeds received
from the sale of shares of our common stock. In the event a holder of our Series
B preferred stock exercises this election, those shares issued as payment of
dividends may be offered and sold from time to time by the holder of these
shares under this prospectus.
We
will commence offering promptly, and sell from time to time, up to 1,500,000
shares of our common stock. The offering price for these shares will range
between $9.50 and $11.50 per share. For additional information on the method and
manner of sale, refer to the section entitled “Plan of Distribution” on
page 86. We will use the net proceeds received from the sale of these
shares to make dividend payments to holders of our Series B preferred stock. The
net proceeds from the sale of these shares are intended to cover dividends
payable for eight quarterly periods.
In
the event a holder of our Series B preferred stock alternatively elects to
receive as payment of dividends shares of our common stock in lieu of the
proceeds received from the sale of shares of our common stock, we will issue
these holders, referred to in this prospectus as the “selling shareholders”, the
shares pursuant to an exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of
the Securities Act of 1933. These shares may be offered and sold, from time to
time, by the selling shareholders and any pledgees, donees, transferees or other
successors-in-interest of the selling shareholders, through public or private
transactions at fixed prices, at prevailing market prices at the time of sale,
at varying prices determined at the time of sale or at negotiated prices. We
will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the shares by the selling
shareholders. Information regarding the identities of the selling shareholders,
the manner in which they acquired or will acquire their shares and the manner in
which the shares are being offered and sold is provided in the “Selling
Shareholders” and “Plan of Distribution” sections of this prospectus. As of the
date of this prospectus, no holder of our Series B preferred stock has elected
to receive shares in lieu of cash as dividend payments on our Series B preferred
stock.
Our
common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “FCEL”.
The last reported sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq National Market
on March 31, 2005 was $9.98 per share.
Our
principal executive offices are located at 3 Great Pasture Road, Danbury,
Connecticut 06813, and our telephone number is (203) 825-6000.
Investing
in our common stock involves risks. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 7.
Neither
the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has
approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or
accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
The
date of this prospectus is April [__], 2005.
You
should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. We have not
authorized anyone to provide you with different information. We are not making
an offer of these securities in any state where the offer is not permitted. You
should not assume that the information contained in this prospectus is accurate
as of any date other than the date on the front of this prospectus.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
Page |
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
|
ii |
ABOUT
THIS PROSPECTUS
|
ii |
BACKGROUND
|
iii |
SUMMARY
|
1 |
RISK
FACTORS
|
7 |
USE
OF PROCEEDS
|
18 |
PRICE
RANGE OF COMMON STOCK
|
19 |
DIVIDEND
POLICY
|
19 |
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
19 |
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
21 |
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
39 |
BUSINESS
|
40 |
MANAGEMENT
|
63 |
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
68 |
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
|
73 |
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
|
73 |
EQUITY
COMPENSATION PLAN AND WARRANT INFORMATION (1)
|
77 |
LIMITATION
ON LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION MATTERS
|
77 |
DESCRIPTION
OF CAPITAL STOCK
|
78 |
SELLING
SHAREHOLDERS
|
85 |
PLAN
OF DISTRIBUTION
|
86 |
LEGAL
MATTERS
|
89 |
EXPERTS
|
89 |
WHERE
YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
|
89 |
INDEX
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
91 |
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
prospectus includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A
of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “approximates,” “believes,”
“estimates,” “intends” and “hopes” and variations of such words and similar
expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. We
intend such forward-looking statements, all of which are qualified by this
statement, to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking
statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and
are including this statement for purposes of complying with these safe harbor
provisions. We have based these statements on our current expectations and
projections about future events. These forward-looking statements are not
guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks and uncertainties that
could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in these
statements. These risks and uncertainties include those set forth under
“Risk Factors.” The forward-looking statements contained in this
prospectus include, among others, statements about:
· |
the
development and commercialization schedule for our fuel cell technology
and products; |
· |
future
funding under government research and development
contracts; |
· |
the
expected cost competitiveness of our fuel cell technology and
products; |
· |
our
intellectual property; |
· |
the
timing and availability of our products; |
· |
the
electric power supply industry and the distributed generation
market; |
· |
our
business strategy; and |
· |
general
economic conditions in the electric power supply industry and our target
markets. |
Except
for our ongoing obligations to disclose material information under the federal
securities laws, we are not obligated to publicly update or revise any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future
events or otherwise. In light of these risks, uncertainties and
assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this prospectus might not
occur.
ABOUT
THIS PROSPECTUS
This
prospectus is part of a registration statement that we filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission, or SEC. Under this registration statement, securities
may be sold by us and/or the selling shareholders, from time to time, as
described in this prospectus. This prospectus provides you with a general
description of the securities that may be offered under this prospectus. Each
time securities are sold, we or the selling shareholders, as the case may be,
are required to provide you with this prospectus and, in certain cases, a
prospectus supplement containing specific information about the terms of the
securities being offered. That prospectus supplement may also add, update or
change information in this prospectus. If there is any inconsistency between the
information in this prospectus and any prospectus supplement, you should rely on
the information in that prospectus supplement. You should read both this
prospectus and any prospectus supplement together with additional information
described in the section entitled “Where You Can Find More
Information.”
BACKGROUND
Unless
the context otherwise requires, references in this prospectus to “FuelCell,”
“we,” “us” and “our” refer to FuelCell Energy, Inc. Direct FuelCell®
and DFC®
are registered trademarks of FuelCell Energy, Inc.
Information
contained in this prospectus concerning the electric power supply industry and
the distributed generation market, our general expectations concerning this
industry and this market, and our position within this industry are based on
market research, industry publications, other publicly available information and
on assumptions made by us based on this information and our knowledge of this
industry and this market, which we believe to be reasonable. Although we believe
that the market research, industry publications and other publicly available
information are reliable, including the sources that we cite in this prospectus,
they have not been independently verified by us and, accordingly, we cannot
assure you that such information is accurate in all material respects. Our
estimates, particularly as they relate to our general expectations concerning
the electric power supply industry and the distributed generation market,
involve risks and uncertainties and are subject to change based on various
factors, including those discussed under the heading entitled “Risk
Factors”.
We
define distributed generation as small (typically 50 MW or less) electric
generation plants (combustion-based such as engines and turbines as well as
non-combustion-based such as fuel cells) located at or near the end use
customer. This is contrasted with central generation that we define as large
power plants (typically hundreds to 1,000 megawatts or larger) that deliver
electricity to end users through a comprehensive transmission and distribution
system.
As
used in this prospectus, all degrees refer to Fahrenheit (oF),
and kilowatt and megawatt numbers designate nominal or rated capacity of the
referenced power plant. As used in this prospectus, “efficiency” or “electrical
efficiency” means the ratio of the electrical energy (AC) generated in the
conversion of a fuel to the total energy contained in the fuel (lower heating
value, the standard for power plant generation, which assumes the water in the
product is in vapor form; as opposed to higher heating value, which assumes the
water in the product is in the liquid form); “overall energy efficiency” refers
to efficiency based on the electrical output plus useful heat output of the
power plant; “kilowatt” (kW) means 1,000 watts; “megawatt” (MW) means 1,000,000
watts; “gigawatt” (GW) means 1,000,000,000 watts; “terawatt” (TW) means
1,000,000,000,000 watts; “kilowatt hour” (kWh) is equal to 1 kW of power
supplied to or taken from an electric circuit steadily for one hour; “megawatt
hour” (MWh) is equal to 1 MW of power supplied to or taken from an electric
circuit steadily for one hour; “gigawatt hour” (GWh) is equal to 1 GW of
power supplied to or taken from an electric circuit steadily for one hour;
“terawatt hour” (TWh) is equal to 1 TW of power supplied to or taken from
an electric circuit steadily for one hour; and “MMBtu” is equal to one million
British Thermal Unit (the amount of heat necessary to raise one pound of pure
water from 59oF
to 60
oF
at a specified constant pressure).
All
dollar amounts are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.
Additional
technical terms and definitions:
Availability
-An
industry standard (IEEE (The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers)
762, "Definitions for Use in Reporting Electric Generating Unit Reliability,
Availability and Productivity") used to compute total operating period hours
less the amount of time a power plant is not producing electricity due to
planned or unplanned maintenance. "Availability" percentage is calculated as
total operating hours since commercial acceptance date (mutually agreed upon
time period when our DFC power plants have operated at a specific output level
for a specified period of time) less hours not producing electricity due to
planned and unplanned maintenance divided by total period hours. Grid
disturbances, force majeur events and site specific issues such as a lack of
available fuel supply or customer infrastructure repair do not penalize the
calculation of availability according to this standard.
Co-generation
Configuration - A
power plant configuration featuring simultaneous on-site
generation of electricity and recovery of waste heat to produce process steam or
hot water, or to use heat for space heating.
Ceramic
Electrolyte - An
active fuel cell component placed between the anode and cathode electrodes in a
ceramic (SOFC) fuel cell, in which current is carried by the movement of oxide
ions.
Cathode
- An
active fuel cell component functioning as a positive (electrically) electrode,
where reduction of oxidant occurs. Also referred to as “Oxidant Electrode”.
Anode
- An
active fuel cell component functioning as a negative electrode, where oxidation
of fuel occurs. Also referred to as “fuel electrode”.
Metallic
Bipolar Plates - The
conductive plates used in a fuel cell stack to provide electrical continuity
from active components of one cell to those in an adjacent cell. The plates also
provide isolation of fuel and air fed to the fuel cell.
Anaerobic
Digester Gas - Fuel
gas (rich in methane) produced in biomass digesters employing bacterial and
controlled oxygen environment, in a municipal or an industrial wastewater
treatment facility.
Humid
Flue Gas - Exhaust
gas from fuel cell and other power plants or a furnace. The gas typically
contains humidity (moisture).
Reforming
- Catalytic
conversion of hydrocarbon fuel (such as pipeline natural gas) to hydrogen-rich
gas, using steam. The hydrogen-rich gas serves as a fuel for the electrochemical
reaction.
Synthesis
Gas - A
gas mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide generally derived from gasification
of coal or other biomass. It can serve as a fuel for the fuel cell after any
required fuel clean up.
Microturbine
- A
gas turbine limited in power output to less than 200 kW. Microturbines are
characterized by low-pressure ratios (less than 5) and high-speed alternators.
Waste heat from fuel cell may be fed to a microturbine to generate additional
electricity. This system is referred to as “Hybrid” power plant.
SUMMARY
This
summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this prospectus and does
not contain all of the information you should consider in making your investment
decision. You should read this summary together with the more detailed
information, including our financial statements and the related notes, included
elsewhere in this prospectus. You should carefully consider, among other things,
the matters discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors.”
FuelCell
Energy, Inc.
We
are a leader in the development and manufacture of fuel cell power plants for
clean, efficient and reliable electric power generation. We have been developing
fuel cell technology since our founding in 1969. We are currently
commercializing our core carbonate fuel cell products and continuing to develop
our next generation of fuel cell products.
Our
executive offices are located at 3 Great Pasture Road, Danbury, Connecticut
06813. Our telephone number is (203) 825-6000. We maintain a web site at
the following Internet address: www.fuelcellenergy.com.
The information on our web site is not part of this prospectus.
Direct
FuelCell (DFC) Power Plants
Our
proprietary DFC power plants electrochemically produce electricity from readily
available hydrocarbon fuels such as natural gas and wastewater treatment gas.
Our current commercial products, the DFC 300A, DFC 1500 and DFC 3000, are rated
in capacity at 250 kW, 1 MW and 2 MW, respectively, and are scalable for
distributed applications up to 50 MW. Our DFC products are designed to meet the
base load power requirements of a wide range of commercial and industrial
customers, including wastewater treatment plants, data centers, manufacturing
and industrial facilities, office buildings, hospitals, universities and hotels,
as well as for use in grid support applications for utility customers. In
addition, our DFC products produce high quality by-product heat energy that can
be harnessed for combined heat and power (CHP) applications. Through February
2005, more than 62 million kWh of electricity have been generated from power
plants incorporating our DFC technology at customer sites throughout the
world.
Our
primary focus is carbonate fuel cell technology, which we have advanced from the
laboratory into standard DFC products. We believe we have established a leading
position for our DFC products in the commercial distributed generation
marketplace due to a number of factors, including:
· |
We
are selling ‘ultra-clean’ high-temperature fuel cell power plants for
stationary base load power, which provide high fuel efficiency and
high-value waste heat for cogeneration
applications. |
· |
We
have strong global distribution partners, including original equipment
manufactures (OEMs) and energy service companies (ESCOs), with expertise
in selling and marketing energy products and services to commercial and
industrial customers worldwide. |
· |
We
obtained commercial product certifications for safety, interconnection,
installation and performance. |
· |
We
are operating a fleet of DFC power plants at customer sites throughout the
world, with a backlog that we expect will double the fleet in service in
the next 12-18 months. |
· |
We
have established production facilities, with equipment in place to produce
50 MW of DFC products annually. |
· |
We
achieved our 2004 value-engineering cost reduction target of 25 percent
and are confident we can continue to reduce
costs. |
· |
We
have expanded our sales and service capabilities to support our DFC
products. |
· |
We
have a strong balance sheet, with over $230 million in cash, cash
equivalents and investments (U.S. Treasury Securities) as of January 31,
2005 to support our growth. |
Strategically,
we are focused on developing sustainable markets targeting customer applications
with the greatest opportunity for multiple and repeat orders. Our success will
depend in part on reducing product cost and increasing operating experience for
our core DFC products. By reducing component costs and improving fuel cell stack
output, we believe we can lower the overall cost of electricity generated by our
products enabling the price of our DFC power plants to be competitive with
existing technologies. As more units are delivered, operating hours will
increase, which should allow us to refine our products, our manufacturing
processes and our marketing efforts. As a result of successes to date and
initiatives under way, we believe we can achieve operating break-even at annual
production volumes of approximately 100 MW. Our production volume was
approximately 6 MW for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2004.
Solid
Oxide Fuel Cells
In
April 2003, we were selected by the Department of Energy (DOE) to lead a project
team for its 10-year, $139 million Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA)
program. The goal of the SECA program is to accelerate the commercialization of
low-cost solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC) for residential, commercial and light
industrial applications ranging in product size from 3 kW to 10 kW each for
applications up to 100 kW. To strengthen our commercialization capabilities for
this contract, we have recently made strategic investments in SOFC technology
including our August 2003 investment of $2.0 million in Versa Power Systems,
Inc., (Versa), our November 2003 acquisition of the SOFC operations of Global
Thermoelectric Inc. (Global), and our November 2004 transfer of substantially
all of our SOFC assets (including those acquired in our acquisition of Global)
and operations to Versa in exchange for an additional equity interest in Versa.
Versa was formed to produce a range of products for the distributed generation
market incorporating its patented reduced temperature SOFC system. If
successfully commercialized, these products would be complementary to our larger
scale DFC product line.
Recent
Developments
On
November 3, 2003 we completed our acquisition of Global Thermoelectric Inc.
(Global) located in Calgary, Canada. At the time of acquisition, Global had been
developing solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) power plants since 1997 with the goal of
commercializing its technology for residential, commercial and light industrial
applications ranging in size from 3 to 10 kW. Through its thermoelectric
generator (TEG) product line, Global also sold thermoelectric generators for use
as a source of electrical power in remote areas.
In
connection with the acquisition, we issued, in the aggregate, approximately 8.2
million of our common shares and exchangeable shares (exchangeable shares)
issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd., our wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary (formerly
FCE Canada Inc.). We also assumed Global’s Series 2 preferred shares. Total
consideration for the acquisition was approximately $94.8 million.
On
May 28, 2004, we sold Global’s TEG business for approximately $16 million. The
sale of the TEG business was effected through a sale of all of the outstanding
common shares of Global. Prior to the sale, Global transferred substantially all
of its assets and liabilities not relating to its TEG business (including
substantially all of Global’s assets and liabilities relating to its SOFC
business and substantially all of its cash) to FuelCell Energy, Ltd. In
addition, prior to the sale, the Global Series 2 preferred shares were cancelled
and replaced with substantially equivalent Class A cumulative redeemable
exchangeable preferred shares (which we refer to as the Series 1 preferred
shares) issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd.
On
October 29, 2004, we redeemed all of the approximately two million issued and
outstanding exchangeable shares issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The exchangeable
shares were redeemed in exchange for shares of our common stock on a one-for-one
basis. The redemption had no impact on the total number of shares of our common
stock deemed outstanding.
On
November 1, 2004, we transferred substantially all of FuelCell Energy, Ltd.’s
SOFC assets and operations to Versa Power Systems, Ltd., a Canadian corporation
and wholly-owned subsidiary of Versa Power Systems, Inc. (Versa). In exchange,
we received additional shares of Versa common stock, increasing our ownership
position in Versa to 42 percent. We also received a second seat on Versa’s
board, which was increased from six to seven members.
Following
the transaction, we pledged the Versa shares we received in the transaction to
Enbridge, Inc., the holder of all of the Series 1 preferred shares issued by
FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The pledge secures our guaranty of the obligations of
FuelCell Energy, Ltd. under the Series 1 preferred shares to Enbridge.
On
November 11, 2004 we entered into a purchase agreement with Citigroup Global
Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc., and Lazard
Freres & Co., LLC (collectively referred to as the “Initial Purchasers”) for
the private placement under Rule 144A of up to 135,000 shares of our 5% Series B
Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (Liquidation Preference
$1,000). On November 17, 2004, we closed on the sale of 100,000 shares of Series
B preferred stock to the Initial Purchasers. Under the terms of the purchase
agreement, the Initial Purchasers were granted an over-allotment option to
purchase up to an additional 35,000 shares of Series B preferred stock through
January 25, 2005.
On
January 14, 2005, we sold an additional 5,875 shares of our Series B preferred
stock to the Initial Purchasers as part of the over-allotment option. Net
proceeds to us were approximately $99 million.
The
Offering
Common
stock offered |
1,800,000
shares.
|
Common
stock to be outstanding after this offering |
49,993,986
shares.(1)
|
Use
of proceeds |
Up
to 300,000 shares of our common stock will be issued to certain of our
employees as partial payment for annual bonuses earned with respect to our
performance targets for our fiscal year ended October 31, 2004 and future
periods. The proceeds from the sale of up to 1,500,000 shares of our
common stock that may be sold by us pursuant to this prospectus, net of
any brokers’ fees or commissions, shall be used by us to make dividend
payments to holders of our Series B preferred stock for eight quarterly
periods. In the alternative, a holder of our Series B preferred stock may
elect to receive as payment of dividends shares of our common stock in
lieu of the proceeds received from the sale of shares of our common stock.
In the event a holder of our Series B preferred stock elects to receive
shares in lieu of cash, we will not receive any portion of the proceeds
from the resale of these shares by the selling shareholders. See sections
entitled “Use of Proceeds” and “Plan of Distribution.”
|
Risk
factors |
See
section entitled “Risk Factors” and other information in this prospectus
for a discussion of factors you should carefully consider before deciding
to invest in shares of our common stock.
|
Dividend
policy |
We
have never paid a cash dividend on our common stock and do not anticipate
paying any cash dividends on common stock in the foreseeable
future.
|
Nasdaq
National Market symbol |
FCEL. |
(1)
The above outstanding share information is based upon shares of our common stock
outstanding as of March 31, 2005. The above outstanding share information
excludes approximately 9,010,640 shares of our common stock issuable upon
conversion of 105,875 shares of our Series B preferred stock (see “Description
of Capital Stock - Series B Preferred Stock”), 225,286 shares of our common
stock issuable upon conversion of the Series 1 preferred shares issued by
FuelCell Energy, Ltd., our wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary (formerly known as
FCE Canada, Inc.) (see “Description of Capital Stock - Series 1 Preferred Shares
and Exchangeable Shares”); 1,500,000 shares of our common stock issuable upon
exercise of warrants outstanding at March 31, 2005 at a weighted average
exercise price of $16.75 per share; 5,493,659 shares of our common stock
issuable upon exercise of options outstanding at March 31, 2005 at a weighted
average exercise price of $10.52 per share under our stock option plans;
1,021,318 shares of our common stock available for future issuance under our
stock option plans; and 416,145 shares of our common stock available for future
issuance under our employee stock purchase plan.
Summary
Financial Information
The
selected consolidated financial data presented below for each of the years in
the five-year period ended October 31, 2004 and for the three month period ended
January 31, 2005 have been derived from our audited and unaudited consolidated
financial statements, respectively, together with the notes thereto included
elsewhere in this prospectus. The data set forth below is qualified by reference
to, and should be read in conjunction with, such financial statements and
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” included elsewhere in this prospectus.
(Amounts
presented in thousands, except for per share amounts)
Consolidated
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
Year
Ended October 31, |
|
Three
Months Ended January 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
18,750 |
|
$ |
17,709 |
|
$ |
33,575 |
|
$ |
20,882 |
|
$ |
17,986 |
|
$ |
2,522 |
|
$ |
5,366 |
|
Product
sales and revenue |
|
|
12,636 |
|
|
16,081 |
|
|
7,656 |
|
|
5,297 |
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
5,032 |
|
|
2,028 |
|
Total
revenues |
|
|
31,386 |
|
|
33,790 |
|
|
41,231 |
|
|
26,179 |
|
|
20,715 |
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
7,394 |
|
Costs
and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of research and development contracts |
|
|
27,290 |
|
|
35,827 |
|
|
45,664 |
|
|
19,033 |
|
|
12,508 |
|
|
2,814 |
|
|
7,471 |
|
Cost
of product sales and revenues |
|
|
39,961 |
|
|
50,391 |
|
|
32,129 |
|
|
16,214 |
|
|
4,968 |
|
|
13,713 |
|
|
7,623 |
|
Administrative
and selling expenses |
|
|
14,901 |
|
|
12,631 |
|
|
10,451 |
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
8,055 |
|
|
3,130 |
|
|
3,701 |
|
Research
and development expenses |
|
|
26,677 |
|
|
8,509 |
|
|
6,806 |
|
|
3,108 |
|
|
1,917 |
|
|
5,233 |
|
|
5,865 |
|
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
12,200 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
12,200 |
|
Total
costs and expenses |
|
|
121,029 |
|
|
107,358 |
|
|
95,050 |
|
|
47,455 |
|
|
27,448 |
|
|
24,890 |
|
|
36,860 |
|
Loss
from operations |
|
|
(89,643 |
) |
|
(73,568 |
) |
|
(53,819 |
) |
|
(21,276 |
) |
|
(6,733 |
) |
|
(17,336 |
) |
|
(29,466 |
) |
License
fee income, net |
|
|
19 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
266 |
|
|
71 |
|
|
67 |
|
Interest
expense |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
(128 |
) |
|
(160 |
) |
|
(116 |
) |
|
(141 |
) |
|
(42 |
) |
|
(37 |
) |
Loss
from equity investments |
|
|
--
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
-- |
|
Interest
and other income, net |
|
|
2,472 |
|
|
6,012 |
|
|
4,876 |
|
|
5,684 |
|
|
2,138 |
|
|
875 |
|
|
918 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
Net
loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(87,289 |
) |
|
(67,414 |
) |
|
(48,840 |
) |
|
(15,438 |
) |
|
(4,459 |
) |
|
(16,772 |
) |
|
(28,518 |
) |
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
846 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
(1,252 |
) |
|
656 |
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(86,443 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
$ |
(15,438 |
) |
$ |
(4,459 |
) |
$ |
(18,024 |
) |
$ |
(27,862 |
) |
Preferred
stock dividends |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
(1,342 |
) |
|
(240 |
) |
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
(19,366 |
) |
$ |
(28,102 |
) |
Basic
and diluted loss per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations |
|
$ |
(1.82 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
$ |
(0.37 |
) |
$ |
(0.60 |
) |
Discontinued
operations |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
$ |
0.01 |
|
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(1.81 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
Basic
and diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
47,875 |
|
|
39,342 |
|
|
39,135 |
|
|
34,359 |
|
|
28,298 |
|
|
48,153 |
|
|
47,369 |
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
As
of October 31, |
|
As
of January 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
2005 |
|
Cash,
cash equivalents and short term investments (U.S. treasury
securities) |
|
$ |
152,395 |
|
$ |
134,750 |
|
$ |
205,996 |
|
$ |
274,760 |
|
$ |
74,754 |
|
$ |
220,438 |
|
Working
capital |
|
|
156,796 |
|
|
143,998 |
|
|
218,423 |
|
|
276,173 |
|
|
71,576 |
|
|
226,803 |
|
Total
current assets |
|
|
178,866 |
|
|
160,792 |
|
|
234,739 |
|
|
289,225 |
|
|
79,405 |
|
|
245,451 |
|
Long-term
investments (U.S. treasury securities) |
|
|
--
|
|
|
18,690 |
|
|
14,542 |
|
|
15,773 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
10,999 |
|
Total
assets |
|
|
236,510 |
|
|
223,363 |
|
|
289,803 |
|
|
334,020 |
|
|
91,028 |
|
|
312,700 |
|
Total
current liabilities |
|
|
22,070 |
|
|
16,794 |
|
|
16,316 |
|
|
13,052 |
|
|
7,588 |
|
|
18,648 |
|
Total
non-current liabilities |
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
1,484 |
|
|
1,785 |
|
|
1,252 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
Total
shareholders’ equity |
|
|
212,964 |
|
|
205,085 |
|
|
271,702 |
|
|
319,716 |
|
|
83,251 |
|
|
292,835 |
|
Book
value per share(1) |
|
$ |
4.42 |
|
$ |
5.20 |
|
$ |
6.93 |
|
$ |
8.20 |
|
$ |
2.65 |
|
$ |
6.08 |
|
(1) Calculated
as total shareholder’s equity divided by common shares issued and outstanding as
of the balance sheet date.
RISK
FACTORS
Investing
in our securities involves risks. Before investing in our securities, you should
carefully consider the following risk factors as well as the other information
included and incorporated by reference in this prospectus. If any of the
following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition, or results of
operations and could be materially and adversely affected. In such cases, the
trading price of our securities could decline, and you may lose all or part of
your investment.
We
have recently incurred losses and anticipate continued losses and negative cash
flow.
We
have been transitioning from a U.S. government contract research and development
company to a commercial products developer and manufacturer. As such, we have
not achieved profitability since our fiscal year ended October 31, 1997 and
expect to continue to incur net losses and generate negative cash flow until we
can produce sufficient revenues to cover our costs.
We
incurred net losses of $86.4 million and $18.0 million for the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2004 and the three months ended January 31, 2005, respectively. We
anticipate that we will continue to incur losses and generate negative cash flow
until we can cost-effectively produce and sell our Direct FuelCell products,
which we do not expect to occur for several years. We may never become
profitable. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may be unable to sustain or
increase our profitability in the future. For the reasons discussed in more
detail below, there are substantial uncertainties associated with our achieving
and sustaining profitability.
Our
cost reduction strategy may not succeed or may be significantly delayed, which
may result in our inability to offer our products at competitive prices and may
adversely affect our sales.
Our
cost reduction strategy is based on the assumption that a significant increase
in production will result in economies of scale. In addition, certain aspects of
our cost reduction strategy rely on advancements in our manufacturing process,
engineering design and technology (including projected power output) that, to a
large degree, are currently not ascertainable. Our failure to achieve a lower
Direct FuelCell product cost structure through economies of scale, improvements
in the manufacturing process and engineering design and technology maturation
would have a material adverse effect on our commercialization plans and,
therefore, our business, prospects, results of operations and financial
condition.
The
production costs of our initial commercial products are higher than their sales
prices. We recognize that successfully implementing our strategy and obtaining a
significant share of the distributed generation market requires that we offer
our Direct FuelCell products at competitive prices, which can only be
accomplished when production costs are cut substantially from current levels. If
we are unable to produce Direct FuelCell products at competitive prices relative
to alternative technologies and products, our target market customers will be
unlikely to buy our fuel cell products.
Our
products will compete with products using other energy sources, and if the
prices of the alternative sources are lower than energy sources used by our
products, sales of our products will be adversely
affected.
Our
Direct FuelCell has been operated using a variety of hydrocarbon fuels,
including natural gas, methanol, diesel, biogas, coal gas, coal mine methane and
propane. If these fuels are not readily available or if their prices increase
such that electricity produced by our products costs more than electricity
provided by other generation sources, our products would be less economically
attractive to potential customers. In addition, we have no control over the
prices of several types of competitive energy sources such as oil, gas or coal.
Significant decreases in the price of these fuels could also have a material
adverse effect on our business because other generation sources could be more
economically attractive to consumers than our products.
Commercialization
of our products depends on conducting successful field trials, and any delay,
performance failure or perceived problem with our field trials could have a
material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations and
financial condition.
One
key aspect of our strategy is to leverage the success of our demonstration,
field trial and field follow projects into long-term distributor-type
relationships that will result in these distributors marketing our Direct
FuelCell products directly to energy customers. For example, we are operating
fourteen Direct FuelCell units in the United States and five Direct FuelCell
units in Japan and MTU CFC Solutions GmbH is currently field-testing eight 250
kW power plants in Germany and Spain that incorporate the Direct FuelCell as
their fuel cell components. We believe that our Direct FuelCell
commercialization program depends upon our conducting additional commercial
field trials and demonstration projects of our power plants and completing
substantial additional research and development.
Our
demonstration, field trial and field follow projects may encounter problems
and/or delays for a number of reasons, including the failure of our technology,
the failure of the technology of others (including our balance of plant
suppliers), the failure to combine these technologies properly (including
control system coordination) and the failure to maintain and service the test
prototypes properly. Many of these potential problems and delays are beyond our
control. A failure by us to conduct field trials and demonstration projects of
our megawatt class products or a failure to site the scheduled sub-megawatt
power plants and complete these commercial field trials and research and
development as currently planned could delay the timetable by which we believe
we can begin to commercially sell our Direct FuelCell products. The failure of
planned commercial field trials to perform as well as we anticipate could also
have a material adverse effect on our commercialization plans, including the
ability to enter into long-term distributor-type relationships for our Direct
FuelCell products. Any delay, performance failure or perceived problem with our
field trials could hurt our reputation in the distributed generation market and,
therefore, could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects,
results of operations and financial condition.
We
currently face and will continue to face significant
competition.
Our
Direct FuelCell currently faces, and will continue to face, significant
competition. We compete on the basis of our products’ reliability, fuel
efficiency, environmental considerations and cost. Technological advances in
alternative energy products or improvements in the electric grid or other fuel
cell technologies may negatively affect the development or sale of some or all
of our products or make our products non-competitive or obsolete prior to
commercialization or afterwards. Other companies, some of which have
substantially greater resources than ours, are currently engaged in the
development of products and technologies that are similar to, or may be
competitive with, our products and technologies.
Many
companies in the United States are involved in fuel cell development, although
we believe we are the only domestic company engaged in significant manufacturing
and commercialization of carbonate fuel cells in the sub-megawatt and megawatt
classes. Emerging fuel cell technologies (and companies developing them) include
proton exchange membrane fuel cells (Ballard Power Systems, Inc.; United
Technologies Corp. or UTC Fuel Cells; and Plug Power), phosphoric acid fuel
cells (UTC Fuel Cells) and solid oxide fuel cells (Siemens Westinghouse Electric
Company, Sulzer Hexis, McDermott, GE/ Honeywell, Delphi and Accumentrics). Each
of these competitors has the potential to capture market share in our target
markets.
There
are other potential carbonate fuel cell competitors internationally. In Asia,
Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries is active in developing carbonate fuel
cells. In Europe, a company in Italy, Ansaldo Fuel Cells, is actively engaged in
carbonate fuel cell development and is a potential competitor. Our licensees in
Germany, MTU CFC Solutions GmbH, and its partners have been the most active in
Europe.
Other
than fuel cell developers, we must also compete with such companies as
Caterpillar, Cummins, and Detroit Diesel, which manufacture more mature
combustion-based equipment, including various engines and turbines, and have
well-established manufacturing, distribution, and operating and cost features.
Significant competition may also come from gas turbine companies like General
Electric, Ingersoll Rand, Solar Turbines and Kawasaki, which have recently made
progress in improving fuel efficiency and reducing pollution in large-size
combined cycle natural gas fueled generators. These companies have also made
efforts to extend these advantages to smaller sizes.
We
may not meet our product development and commercialization milestones, which may
have a material adverse effect on our operations and stock
price.
We
have established product development and commercialization milestones that we
use to assess our progress toward developing commercially viable Direct FuelCell
products. These milestones relate to technology and design improvements as well
as to dates for achieving development goals. To gauge our progress, we operate,
test and evaluate our Direct FuelCell products under actual conditions. If our
systems exhibit technical defects or are unable to meet cost or performance
goals, including power output, useful life and reliability, our
commercialization schedule could be delayed and potential purchasers of our
initial commercial Direct FuelCell products may decline to purchase them or
choose to purchase alternative technologies. We cannot be sure that we will
successfully achieve our milestones in the future or that any failure to achieve
these milestones will not result in potential competitors gaining advantages in
our target market. Failure to meet publicly announced milestones might have a
material adverse effect on our operations and our stock price.
We
have limited experience manufacturing our Direct FuelCell products on a
commercial basis, which may adversely affect our planned increases in production
capacity and our ability to satisfy customer
requirements.
To
date, we have focused primarily on research and development and conducting
demonstrations and field trials. We have limited experience manufacturing our
Direct FuelCell products on a commercial basis. We have installed equipment that
will allow us to produce 50 MW of Direct FuelCell products per year. We expect
that we will then increase our manufacturing capacity based on market demand. We
believe that we can expand our manufacturing capacity to between 125 and 150 MW
of Direct FuelCell products at our current facility. We cannot be sure that we
will be able to achieve our planned increases in production capacity. Also, as
we scale up our production capacity, we cannot be sure that unplanned failures
or other technical problems relating to the manufacturing process will not
occur.
Even
if we are successful in achieving our planned increases in production capacity,
we cannot be sure that we will do so in time to meet our product
commercialization schedule or to satisfy the requirements of our customers.
Given our dependence on government research and development contracts and the
necessity of providing government entities with substantial amounts of
information, our sales process has historically been long and time-consuming. We
will need to continue to shorten the time from initial contact to final product
delivery if we hope to expand production, reach a wider customer base and
forecast revenues with any degree of certainty. Additionally, we cannot be sure
that we will be able to develop efficient, low-cost manufacturing capabilities
and processes (including automation) that will enable us to meet our cost goals
and profitability projections. Our failure to shorten the sales cycle for our
Direct FuelCell products or to develop these advanced manufacturing capabilities
and processes, or meet our cost goals, could have a material adverse effect on
our business, prospects, results of operations and financial
condition.
Unanticipated
increases or decreases in business growth may result in adverse financial
consequences for us.
If
our business grows more quickly than we anticipate, our existing and planned
manufacturing facilities may become inadequate and we may need to seek out new
or additional space, at considerable cost to us. If our business does not grow
as quickly as we expect, our existing and planned manufacturing facilities
would, in part, represent excess capacity for which we may not recover the cost;
in that circumstance, our revenues may be inadequate to support our committed
costs and our planned growth and our gross margins and business strategy would
be adversely affected.
Our
commercialization plans are dependent on market acceptance of our Direct
FuelCell products.
Our
commercialization plans are dependent upon market acceptance of, as well as
enhancements to, those products. Fuel cell systems represent an emerging market,
and we cannot be sure that potential customers will accept fuel cells as a
replacement for traditional power sources. As is typical in a rapidly evolving
industry, demand and market acceptance for recently introduced products and
services are subject to a high level of uncertainty and risk. Since the
distributed generation market is new and evolving, it is difficult to predict
with certainty the size of the market and its growth rate. The development of a
market for our Direct FuelCell products may be affected by many factors that are
out of our control, including:
• the
cost competitiveness of our fuel cell products;
• the
future costs of natural gas and other fuels used by our fuel cell
products;
• consumer
reluctance to try a new product;
• consumer
perceptions of the safety of our fuel cell products;
• the
pace of utility deregulation nationwide, which could affect the market for
distributed generation;
• local
permitting and environmental requirements; and
• the
emergence of newer, more competitive technologies and products.
If
a sufficient market fails to develop or develops more slowly than we anticipate,
we may be unable to recover the losses we will have incurred in the development
of Direct FuelCell products and may never achieve profitability.
As
we continue to commercialize our Direct FuelCell products, we will continue to
develop warranties, production guarantees and other terms and conditions
relating to our products that will be acceptable to the marketplace, and
continue to develop a service organization that will aid in servicing our
products and obtain self-regulatory certifications, if available, with respect
to our products. Failure to achieve any of these objectives may also slow the
development of a sufficient market for our products and, therefore, have a
material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Our
government research and development contracts are subject to the risk of
termination by the contracting party and we may not realize the full amounts
allocated under the contracts due to the lack of Congressional
appropriations.
Our
fuel cell revenues have been principally derived from a long-term cooperative
agreement and other contracts with the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”), the
U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Navy and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. These agreements are important to the continued development and
commercialization of our technology and our products.
Generally,
our U.S. government research and development contracts, including the DOE
(Product Design Improvement) cooperative
agreement, are subject to the risk of termination at the convenience of the
contracting agency. Furthermore, these contracts, irrespective of the amounts
allocated by the contracting agency, are subject to annual congressional
appropriations and the results of government or agency sponsored audits of our
cost reduction efforts and our cost projections. We can only receive funds under
these contracts ultimately made available to us annually by Congress as a result
of the appropriations process. Accordingly, we cannot be sure whether we will
receive the full amount allocated by the DOE under our DOE cooperative
agreements or the full amounts awarded under our other government research and
development contracts. Failure to receive the full amounts under any of our
government research and development contracts could materially and adversely
affect our commercialization plans and, therefore, our business, prospects,
results of operations and financial condition.
The
United States government has certain rights relating to our intellectual
property, including restricting or taking title to certain
patents.
Many
of our United States patents relating to our carbonate fuel cell technology are
the result of government-funded research and development programs, including the
DOE cooperative agreement. Four of our patents that were the result of
DOE-funded research prior to January 1988 (the date that we qualified as a
“small business”) are owned by the United States government and have been
licensed to us. This license is revocable only in the limited circumstances
where it has been demonstrated that we are not making an effort to commercialize
the invention. We own all patents resulting from research funded by our DOE
contracts awarded after January 1988 to date, based on our “small business”
status when each contract was awarded. Under current regulations, patents
resulting from research funded by government agencies other than the DOE are
owned by us, whether or not we are a “small business.”
Fourteen
United States patents that we own have resulted from government-funded research
and are subject to the risk of exercise of “march-in” rights by the government.
March-in rights refer to the right of the United States government or a
government agency to exercise its non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable
worldwide license to any technology developed under contracts funded by the
government if the contractor fails to continue to develop the technology. These
“march-in” rights permit the United States government to take title to these
patents and license the patented technology to third parties if the contractor
fails to utilize the patents. In addition, our DOE-funded research and
development agreements also require us to agree that we will not provide to a
foreign entity any fuel cell technology subject to that agreement unless the
fuel cell technology will be substantially manufactured in the U.S. Accordingly,
we could lose some or all of the value of these patents.
A
failure to qualify as a “small business” could adversely affect our rights to
own future patents under DOE-funded contracts.
Qualifying
as a “small business” under DOE contracts allows us to own the patents that we
develop under DOE contracts. A “small business” under applicable government
regulations generally consists of no more than 500 employees. If we continue to
grow, we will no longer qualify as a “small business” and no longer own future
patents we develop under contracts, grants or cooperative agreements funded by
the DOE based on such certification, unless we obtain a patent waiver from the
DOE. As a result of our acquisition of Global, the number of our employees
increased and therefore, we temporarily did not qualify as a “small business.”
Following the sale of Global and its TEG product line on May 27, 2004, we again
qualify as a “small business”; however, we cannot assure you that we will
continue to qualify as a “small business” in the future.
Our
future success and growth is dependent on our distribution
strategy.
We
do not plan to establish a direct distribution infrastructure for our Direct
FuelCell products. A key aspect of our strategy is to use multiple third-party
distribution channels to ultimately service our diverse customer base. Depending
on the needs of the customer, our Direct FuelCell products could be distributed
through a value-added distributor who could provide a package of our products
and various other components such as flywheels and battery storage devices;
through an energy services company that could arrange various ancillary services
for the customer; or through power generation equipment suppliers.
We
cannot assure you that we will enter into distributor relationships that are
consistent with, or sufficient to support, our commercialization plans or our
growth strategy or that these relationships will be on terms favorable to us.
Even if we enter into these types of relationships, we cannot assure you that
the distributors with which we form relationships will focus adequate resources
on selling our products or will be successful in selling them. Some of these
distributor arrangements have or will require that we grant exclusive
distribution rights to companies in defined territories. These exclusive
arrangements could result in us being unable to enter into other arrangements at
a time when the distributor with which we form a relationship is not successful
in selling our products or has reduced its commitment to marketing our products.
In addition, two of our current distributor arrangements include, and some
future distributor arrangements may also include, the issuance of equity and
warrants to purchase our equity, which may have an adverse effect on our stock
price. To the extent we enter into distributor relationships, the failure of
these distributors in assisting us with the marketing and distribution of our
products may adversely affect our results of operations and financial
condition.
We
cannot be sure that MTU will continue to, or original equipment manufacturers
(“OEMs”) will, manufacture or package products using our Direct FuelCell
components. In this area, our success will largely depend upon our ability to
make our products compatible with the power plant products of OEMs and the
ability of these OEMs to sell their products containing our products. In
addition, some OEMs may need to redesign or modify their existing power plant
products to fully incorporate our products. Accordingly, any integration,
design, manufacturing or marketing problems encountered by MTU or other OEMs
could adversely affect the market for our Direct FuelCell products and,
therefore, our business, prospects, results of operations and financial
condition.
We
depend on third party suppliers for the development and supply of key components
for Direct FuelCell products.
We
purchase several key components of our Direct FuelCell products from other
companies and rely on third-party suppliers for the balance-of-plant components
in our Direct FuelCell products. There are a limited number of suppliers for
some of the key components of Direct FuelCell products. A supplier’s failure to
develop and supply components in a timely manner or to supply components that
meet our quality, quantity or cost requirements or technical specifications or
our inability to obtain alternative sources of these components on a timely
basis or on terms acceptable to us could harm our ability to manufacture our
Direct FuelCell products. In addition, to the extent the processes that our
suppliers use to manufacture components are proprietary, we may be unable to
obtain comparable components from alternative suppliers.
We
do not know when or whether we will secure long-term supply relationships with
any of our suppliers or whether such relationships will be on terms that will
allow us to achieve our objectives. Our business, prospects, results of
operations and financial condition could be harmed if we fail to secure
long-term relationships with entities that will supply the required components
for our Direct FuelCell products.
We
depend on our intellectual property, and our failure to protect that
intellectual property could adversely affect our future growth and
success.
Failure
to protect our existing intellectual property rights may result in the loss of
our exclusivity or the right to use our technologies. If we do not adequately
ensure our freedom to use certain technology, we may have to pay others for
rights to use their intellectual property, pay damages for infringement or
misappropriation or be enjoined from using such intellectual property. We do not
currently conduct freedom to operate analyses. We rely on patent, trade secret,
trademark and copyright law to protect our intellectual property. The patents
that we have obtained will expire between 2005 and 2023 and the average
remaining life of our U.S. patents is approximately 10.7 years.
Some
of our intellectual property is not covered by any patent or patent application
and includes trade secrets and other know-how that is not patentable,
particularly as it relates to our manufacturing processes and engineering
design. In addition, some of our intellectual property includes technologies and
processes that may be similar to the patented technologies and processes of
third parties. If we are found to be infringing third-party patents, we do not
know whether we will able to obtain licenses to use such patents on acceptable
terms, if at all. Our patent position is subject to complex factual and legal
issues that may give rise to uncertainty as to the validity, scope and
enforceability of a particular patent. Accordingly, we cannot assure you
that:
•
any
of the U.S., Canadian or other foreign patents owned by us or other patents that
third parties license to us will not be invalidated, circumvented, challenged,
rendered unenforceable or licensed to others; or
•
any
of our pending or future patent applications will be issued with the breadth of
claim coverage sought by us, if issued at all.
In
addition, effective patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret protection may
be unavailable, limited or not applied for in certain foreign
countries.
We
also seek to protect our proprietary intellectual property, including
intellectual property that may not be patented or patentable, in part by
confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, inventors’ rights agreements with
our subcontractors, vendors, suppliers, consultants, strategic partners and
employees. We cannot assure you that these agreements will not be breached, that
we will have adequate remedies for any breach or that such persons or
institutions will not assert rights to intellectual property arising out of
these relationships. Certain of our intellectual property has been licensed to
us on a non-exclusive basis from third parties that may also license such
intellectual property to others, including our competitors. If our licensors are
found to be infringing third-party patents, we do not know whether we will be
able to obtain licenses to use the intellectual property licensed to us on
acceptable terms, if at all.
If
necessary or desirable, we may seek extensions of existing licenses or further
licenses under the patents or other intellectual property rights of others.
However, we can give no assurances that we will obtain such extensions or
further licenses or that the terms of any offered licenses will be acceptable to
us. The failure to obtain a license from a third party for intellectual property
that we use at present could cause us to incur substantial liabilities, and to
suspend the manufacture or shipment of products or our use of processes
requiring the use of that intellectual property.
While
we are not currently engaged in any material intellectual property litigation,
we could become subject to lawsuits in which it is alleged that we have
infringed the intellectual property rights of others or commence lawsuits
against others who we believe are infringing upon our rights. Our involvement in
intellectual property litigation could result in significant expense to us,
adversely affecting the development of sales of the challenged product or
intellectual property and diverting the efforts of our technical and management
personnel, whether or not that litigation is resolved in our favor.
Our
future success will depend on our ability to attract and retain qualified
management and technical personnel.
Our
future success is substantially dependent on the continued services and on the
performance of our executive officers and other key management, engineering,
scientific, manufacturing and operating personnel, particularly Jerry Leitman,
our President and Chief Executive Officer. The loss of the services of any
executive officer, including Mr. Leitman, or other key management, engineering,
scientific, manufacturing and operating personnel, could materially adversely
affect our business. Our ability to achieve our development and
commercialization plans will also depend on our ability to attract and retain
additional qualified management and technical personnel. Recruiting personnel
for the fuel cell industry is competitive. We do not know whether we will be
able to attract or retain additional qualified management and technical
personnel. Our inability to attract and retain additional qualified management
and technical personnel, or the departure of key employees, could materially and
adversely affect our development and commercialization plans and, therefore, our
business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition.
Our
management may be unable to manage rapid growth
effectively.
We
expect to rapidly expand our manufacturing capabilities, accelerate the
commercialization of our products and enter a period of rapid growth, which will
place a significant strain on our senior management team and our financial and
other resources. The proposed expansion will expose us to increased competition,
greater overhead, marketing and support costs and other risks associated with
the commercialization of a new product. Our ability to manage our rapid growth
effectively will require us to continue to improve our operations, to improve
our financial and management information systems and to train, motivate and
manage our employees. Difficulties in effectively managing the budgeting,
forecasting and other process control issues presented by such a rapid expansion
could harm our business, prospects, results of operations and financial
condition.
We
may be affected by environmental and other governmental
regulation.
As
we begin to commercialize our Direct FuelCell products, we will be subject to
federal, state, provincial or local regulation with respect to, among other
things, emissions and siting. Assuming no co-generation applications are used in
conjunction with our larger Direct FuelCell plants, they will discharge humid
flue gas at temperatures of approximately 700-800o
F, water at temperatures of approximately 10-20
o F
above surrounding air temperatures and carbon dioxide. These emissions will
require permits that we expect (but cannot ensure) will be similar to those
applicable to generating units.
In
addition, it is possible that industry-specific laws and regulations will be
adopted covering matters such as transmission scheduling, distribution and the
characteristics and quality of our products, including installation and
servicing. This regulation could limit the growth in the use of carbonate fuel
cell products, decrease the acceptance of fuel cells as a commercial product and
increase our costs and, therefore, the price of our Direct FuelCell products.
Accordingly, compliance with existing or future laws and regulations as we begin
to commercialize and site our products could have a material adverse effect on
our business, prospects, results of operations and financial
condition.
Utility
companies could impose customer fees or interconnection requirements on our
customers that could make our products less
desirable.
Utility
companies commonly charge fees to larger, industrial customers for disconnecting
from the electric grid or for having the capacity to use power from the electric
grid for back up purposes. These fees could increase the cost to our customers
of using our Direct FuelCell products and could make our products less
desirable, thereby harming our business, prospects, results of operations and
financial condition.
Several
states (Texas, New York, California and others) have created and adopted or are
in the process of creating their own interconnection regulations covering both
technical and financial requirements for interconnection to utility grids.
Depending on the complexities of the requirements, installation of our systems
may become burdened with additional costs that might have a negative impact on
our ability to sell systems. There is also a burden in having to track the
requirements of individual states and design equipment to comply with the
varying standards. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers has
been working to create an interconnection standard addressing the technical
requirements for distributed generation to interconnect to utility grids. Many
parties are hopeful that this standard will be adopted nationally when it is
completed to help reduce the barriers to deployment of distributed generation
such as fuel cells; however this standard may be delayed or never completed
thereby limiting the commercial prospects and profitability of our fuel cell
systems.
Changes
in government regulations and electric utility industry restructuring may affect
demand for our Direct FuelCell products.
Our
target market, the distributed generation market, is driven by deregulation and
restructuring of the electric utility industry in the United States and
elsewhere and by the requirements of utilities, independent power producers and
end users. Deregulation of the electric utility industry is subject to
government policies that will determine the pace and extent of deregulation.
Many states have recently delayed the implementation of deregulation as a result
of power disturbances in California several summers ago. Changes in government
and public policy over time could further delay or otherwise affect deregulation
and, therefore, adversely affect our prospects for commercializing our Direct
FuelCell products and our financial results. We cannot predict how the
deregulation and restructuring of the electric utility industry will ultimately
affect the market for our Direct FuelCell products.
We
could be liable for environmental damages resulting from our research,
development or manufacturing operations.
Our
business exposes us to the risk of harmful substances escaping into the
environment, resulting in personal injury or loss of life, damage to or
destruction of property, and natural resource damage. Depending on the nature of
the claim, our current insurance policies may not adequately reimburse us for
costs incurred in settling environmental damage claims, and in some instances,
we may not be reimbursed at all. Our business is subject to numerous federal,
state and local laws and regulations that govern environmental protection and
human health and safety. These laws and regulations have changed frequently in
the past and it is reasonable to expect additional and more stringent changes in
the future.
Our
operations may not comply with future laws and regulations and we may be
required to make significant unanticipated capital and operating expenditures.
If we fail to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations,
governmental authorities may seek to impose fines and penalties on us or to
revoke or deny the issuance or renewal of operating permits and private parties
may seek damages from us. Under those circumstances, we might be required to
curtail or cease operations, conduct site remediation or other corrective
action, or pay substantial damage claims.
We
may be required to conduct environmental remediation activities, which could be
expensive.
We
are subject to a number of environmental laws and regulations, including those
concerning the handling, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous materials.
These environmental laws generally impose liability on present and former owners
and operators, transporters and generators for remediation of contaminated
properties. We believe that our businesses are operating in compliance in all
material respects with applicable environmental laws, many of which provide for
substantial penalties for violations. We cannot assure you that future changes
in such laws, interpretations of existing regulations or the discovery of
currently unknown problems or conditions will not require substantial additional
expenditures. Any noncompliance with these laws and regulations could subject us
to material administrative, civil or criminal penalties or other liabilities. In
addition, we may be required to incur substantial costs to comply with current
or future environmental and safety laws and regulations.
Our
products use inherently dangerous, flammable fuels, operate at high temperatures
and use corrosive carbonate material, each of which could subject our business
to product liability claims.
Our
business exposes us to potential product liability claims that are inherent in
hydrogen and products that use hydrogen. Hydrogen is a flammable gas and
therefore a potentially dangerous product. Hydrogen is typically generated from
gaseous and liquid fuels that are also flammable and dangerous, such as propane,
natural gas or methane, in a process known as reforming. Natural gas and propane
could leak into a residence or commercial location and combust if ignited by
another source. In addition, our Direct FuelCell products operate at high
temperatures and our Direct FuelCell products use corrosive carbonate material,
which could expose us to potential liability claims. Any accidents involving our
products or other hydrogen-using products could materially impede widespread
market acceptance and demand for our Direct FuelCell products. In addition, we
might be held responsible for damages beyond the scope of our insurance
coverage. We also cannot predict whether we will be able to maintain our
insurance coverage on acceptable terms.
We
are subject to risks inherent in international
operations.
Since
we plan to market our Direct FuelCell products both inside and outside the
United States and Canada, our success depends, in part, on our ability to secure
international customers and our ability to manufacture products that meet
foreign regulatory and commercial requirements in target markets. We have
limited experience developing and manufacturing our products to comply with the
commercial and legal requirements of international markets. In addition, we are
subject to tariff regulations and requirements for export licenses, particularly
with respect to the export of some of our technologies. We face numerous
challenges in our international expansion, including unexpected changes in
regulatory requirements, fluctuations in currency exchange rates, longer
accounts receivable requirements and collections, difficulties in managing
international operations, potentially adverse tax consequences, restrictions on
repatriation of earnings and the burdens of complying with a wide variety of
international laws. Any of these factors could adversely affect our operations
and revenues.
We
have large and influential stockholders, which may make it difficult for a third
party to acquire our common stock.
MTU
currently owns approximately 5.7% of our outstanding common stock (based upon
the number of shares of our common stock outstanding as of March 31, 2005).
James D. Gerson beneficially owns approximately 2.8% of our outstanding common
stock. Loeb Investors Co. LXXV and Warren Bagatelle (a managing director of an
affiliate of Loeb Investors Co. LXXV) collectively beneficially own
approximately 2.3% of our outstanding common stock (based upon the number of
shares of our common stock outstanding as of March 31, 2005). These ownership
levels could make it difficult for a third party to acquire our common stock or
have input into the decisions made by our board of directors, which include
Michael Bode (Chief Executive Officer of MTU CFC Solutions GmbH), James D.
Gerson, Warren Bagatelle and Thomas L. Kempner (Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of an affiliate of Loeb Investors Co. LXXV). MTU is also a licensee of
our technology and a purchaser of our Direct FuelCell products. Therefore, it
may be in MTU’s interest to possess substantial influence over matters
concerning our overall strategy and technological and commercial development. In
addition, Wellington
Management Company, LLP owns
approximately 13.8% of our outstanding common stock and is therefore in a
position to substantially influence matters submitted to a vote of our security
holders.
MTU
may develop competing technologies for its own
products.
MTU
is currently developing carbonate fuel cell technologies based on the know-how
that we have provided to MTU under license. If MTU develops its own carbonate
fuel cell design before our license expires in 2010, it must use good faith
efforts to license the technology to us. If MTU is successful but does not grant
us a license, it may be directly competing with us while having a significant
ownership interest in us, and a seat on our board of directors. We have agreed
with MTU to continue developing products with as much commonality as possible.
However, the license agreement between us and MTU provides that each of us
retains the right to independently pursue the development of carbonate fuel cell
technologies.
Our
stock price has been and could remain volatile.
The
market price for our common stock has been and may continue to be volatile and
subject to extreme price and volume fluctuations in response to market and other
factors, including the following, some of which are beyond our
control:
• failure
to meet our product development and commercialization milestones;
• variations
in our quarterly operating results from the expectations of securities analysts
or investors;
• downward
revisions in securities analysts’ estimates or changes in general market
conditions;
• announcements
of technological innovations or new products or services by us or our
competitors;
• announcements
by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships,
joint ventures or capital commitments;
• additions
or departures of key personnel;
• investor
perception of our industry or our prospects;
• insider
selling or buying;
• demand
for our common stock; and
• general
technological or economic trends.
In
the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of their stock,
many companies have been the subjects of securities class action litigation. If
we became involved in securities class action litigation in the future, it could
result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and
resources and could harm our stock price, business, prospects, results of
operations and financial condition.
Provisions
of Delaware and Connecticut law and of our charter and by-laws may make a
takeover more difficult.
Provisions
in our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and in Delaware and Connecticut
corporate law may make it difficult and expensive for a third party to pursue a
tender offer, change in control or takeover attempt that is opposed by our
management and board of directors. Public stockholders who might desire to
participate in such a transaction may not have an opportunity to do so. These
anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede the ability of public
stockholders to benefit from a change in control or change in our management and
board of directors.
We
depend on relationships with strategic partners, and the terms and
enforceability of many of these relationships are not
certain.
We
have entered into relationships with strategic partners for design, product
development and distribution of our existing products, and products under
development, some of which may not have been documented by a definitive
agreement. The terms and conditions of many of these agreements allow for
termination by the partners. Termination of any of these agreements could
adversely affect our ability to design, develop and distribute these products to
the marketplace. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully
negotiate and execute definitive agreements with any of these partners, and
failure to do so may effectively terminate the relevant
relationship.
Future
sales of substantial amounts of our common stock could affect the market price
of our common stock.
Future
sales of substantial amounts of our common stock, or securities convertible or
exchangeable into shares of our common stock, into the public market, including
shares of our common stock issued upon exercise of options and warrants, or
perceptions that those sales could occur, could adversely affect the prevailing
market price of our common stock and our ability to raise capital in the
future.
The
rights of the Series 1 preferred shares and Series B preferred shares could
negatively impact our company.
The
terms of the Series 1 preferred shares issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd., our
wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary, provide rights to the holder, Enbridge, Inc.
(Enbridge), including dividend and conversion rights among others that could
negatively impact us. For example, the terms of the Series 1 preferred shares
provide that the holders are entitled to receive cumulative dividends for each
calendar quarter for so long as such shares are outstanding. Assuming the
exchange rate for Canadian dollars is Cdn.$1.3104 to U.S.$1.00 at the time of
the applicable dividend payment date, we could be required to pay a preferred
dividend of approximately $238,477 per calendar quarter, subject to reduction in
accordance with the terms of the Series 1 preferred shares. The terms of the
Series 1 preferred shares also require that the holder be paid any accrued and
unpaid dividends on December 31, 2010. To the extent that there is a significant
amount of accrued dividends that is unpaid as of December 31, 2010 and we do not
have sufficient working capital at that time to pay the accrued dividends, our
financial condition could be adversely affected. We have guaranteed these
dividend obligations, including paying a minimum of Cdn.$500,000 in cash
annually to Enbridge for so long as Enbridge holds the Series 1 preferred
shares. We have also guaranteed the liquidation obligations of FuelCell Energy,
Ltd. under the Series 1 preferred shares.
We
are also required to issue common stock to the holder of the Series 1 preferred
shares if and when the holder exercises its conversion rights. The number of
shares of common stock that we may issue upon conversion could be significant
and dilutive to our existing stockholders. For example, assuming the holder of
the Series 1 preferred shares exercises its conversion rights after July 31,
2020, the exchange rate for Canadian dollars is Cdn.$1.3104 to U.S.$1.00 at the
time of such conversion and our common stock price is $14.62 at the time of such
conversion, we would be required to issue approximately 1,373,615 shares of our
common stock.
The
terms of the Series B preferred shares also provide rights to their holders that
could negatively impact us. Holders of the Series B preferred shares
are entitled to receive cumulative dividends at the rate of $50 per share per
year, payable either in cash or in shares of our common stock. To
the extent the dividend is paid in shares, additional issuances could be
dilutive to our existing stockholders and the sale of those shares could have a
negative impact on the price of our common stock. The Series B preferred
stock is also convertible into common stock at a price of $11.75 per
share. Conversion of the Series B preferred stock at a time when the price
of our common stock is greater than $11.75 per share would also have a dilutive
impact on our existing stockholders. Furthermore, the conversion rate
applicable to the preferred stock is subject to adjustment upon the occurrence
of certain events.
USE
OF PROCEEDS
Up
to 300,000 shares of our common stock registered on a registration statement on
Form S-1, for which this prospectus forms a part, will be issued to certain of
our employees as partial payment for annual bonuses earned with respect to our
performance targets for our fiscal year ended October 31, 2004 and future
periods.
The
proceeds from the sale of up to 1,500,000 shares of our common stock that may be
offered promptly and sold by us from time to time pursuant to this prospectus,
net of any broker’s fee or commissions, shall be used to make dividend payments
to holders of our Series B preferred stock for each of the eight quarterly
periods ending on May 15, August 15 and November 15, 2005, February 15, May 15,
August 15 and November 15, 2006 and February 15, 2007. (See section entitled
“Plan of Distribution”). In the alternative, a holder of our Series B preferred
stock may elect to receive as payment of dividends shares of our common stock in
lieu of the proceeds received from the sale of shares of our common stock.
Shares issued to holders of our Series B preferred stock as dividend payments
may be offered and sold from time to time by the selling shareholders under this
prospectus and we will not receive any portion of the proceeds from the sale of
these shares by the selling shareholders.
PRICE
RANGE OF COMMON STOCK
Our
common stock has been publicly traded since June 25, 1992. From September 21,
1994 through February 25, 1997, it was quoted on the NASDAQ National Market, and
from February 26, 1997 through June 6, 2000 it was traded on the American Stock
Exchange.
Our
common stock has traded under the symbol “FCEL” on the Nasdaq Stock Market since
June 7, 2000. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sale
prices for our common stock for the fiscal periods indicated as reported by the
Nasdaq Stock Market during the indicated quarters.
|
|
Common
Stock Price |
|
|
|
High |
|
Low |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended October 31, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
21.85 |
|
$ |
13.55 |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
$ |
18.46 |
|
$ |
15.15 |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
$ |
16.73 |
|
$ |
6.62 |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
$ |
8.01 |
|
$ |
4.58 |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended October 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
9.05 |
|
$ |
5.39 |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
$ |
6.22 |
|
$ |
5.03 |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
$ |
9.90 |
|
$ |
6.28 |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
$ |
15.37 |
|
$ |
6.81 |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended October 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
17.25 |
|
$ |
11.44 |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
$ |
19.44 |
|
$ |
11.86 |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
$ |
17.23 |
|
$ |
8.36 |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
$ |
13.14 |
|
$ |
7.42 |
|
Fiscal
Year Ended October 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
13.01 |
|
$ |
8.02 |
|
Second
Quarter (through March 31, 2005) |
|
$ |
11.85 |
|
$ |
8.88 |
|
On
March 31, 2005, the last reported sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq
Stock Market was $9.98 per share. As of March 31, 2005, there were 823 holders
of record of our common stock.
DIVIDEND
POLICY
We
have never paid a cash dividend on our common stock and do not anticipate paying
any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. In
addition, the terms of our Series B preferred shares prohibit the payment of
dividends on our common stock unless all dividends on the Series B preferred
stock have been paid in full.
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
The
selected consolidated financial data presented below for each of the years in
the five-year period ended October 31, 2004 and for the three month period ended
January 31, 2005 have been derived from our audited and unaudited consolidated
financial statements, respectively, together with the notes thereto included
elsewhere in this prospectus. The data set forth below is qualified by reference
to, and should be read in conjunction with, such financial statements and
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” included elsewhere in this prospectus.
(Amounts
presented in thousands, except for per share amounts)
Consolidated
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
Year
Ended October 31, |
|
Three
Months Ended January 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
18,750 |
|
$ |
17,709 |
|
$ |
33,575 |
|
$ |
20,882 |
|
$ |
17,986 |
|
$ |
2,522 |
|
$ |
5,366 |
|
Product
sales and revenue |
|
|
12,636 |
|
|
16,081 |
|
|
7,656 |
|
|
5,297 |
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
5,032 |
|
|
2,028 |
|
Total
revenues |
|
|
31,386 |
|
|
33,790 |
|
|
41,231 |
|
|
26,179 |
|
|
20,715 |
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
7,394 |
|
Costs
and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of research and development contracts |
|
|
27,290 |
|
|
35,827 |
|
|
45,664 |
|
|
19,033 |
|
|
12,508 |
|
|
2,814 |
|
|
7,471 |
|
Cost
of product sales and revenues |
|
|
39,961 |
|
|
50,391 |
|
|
32,129 |
|
|
16,214 |
|
|
4,968 |
|
|
13,713 |
|
|
7,623 |
|
Administrative
and selling expenses |
|
|
14,901 |
|
|
12,631 |
|
|
10,451 |
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
8,055 |
|
|
3,130 |
|
|
3,701 |
|
Research
and development expenses |
|
|
26,677 |
|
|
8,509 |
|
|
6,806 |
|
|
3,108 |
|
|
1,917 |
|
|
5,233 |
|
|
5,865 |
|
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
12,200 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
12,200 |
|
Total
costs and expenses |
|
|
121,029 |
|
|
107,358 |
|
|
95,050 |
|
|
47,455 |
|
|
27,448 |
|
|
24,890 |
|
|
36,860 |
|
Loss
from operations |
|
|
(89,643 |
) |
|
(73,568 |
) |
|
(53,819 |
) |
|
(21,276 |
) |
|
(6,733 |
) |
|
(17,336 |
) |
|
(29,466 |
) |
License
fee income, net |
|
|
19 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
266 |
|
|
71 |
|
|
67 |
|
Interest
expense |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
(128 |
) |
|
(160 |
) |
|
(116 |
) |
|
(141 |
) |
|
(42 |
) |
|
(37 |
) |
Loss
from equity investments |
|
|
--
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
-- |
|
Interest
and other income, net |
|
|
2,472 |
|
|
6,012 |
|
|
4,876 |
|
|
5,684 |
|
|
2,138 |
|
|
875 |
|
|
918 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
Net
loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(87,289 |
) |
|
(67,414 |
) |
|
(48,840 |
) |
|
(15,438 |
) |
|
(4,459 |
) |
|
(16,772 |
) |
|
(28,518 |
) |
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
846 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
(1,252 |
) |
|
656 |
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(86,443 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
$ |
(15,438 |
) |
$ |
(4,459 |
) |
$ |
(18,024 |
) |
$ |
(27,862 |
) |
Preferred
stock dividends |
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
(1,342 |
) |
|
(240 |
) |
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
--
|
|
$ |
(19,366 |
) |
$ |
(28,102 |
) |
Basic
and diluted loss per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations |
|
$ |
(1.82 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
$ |
(0.37 |
) |
$ |
(0.60 |
) |
Discontinued
operations |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
$ |
0.01 |
|
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(1.81 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
$ |
(0.45 |
) |
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
Basic
and diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
47,875 |
|
|
39,342 |
|
|
39,135 |
|
|
34,359 |
|
|
28,298 |
|
|
48,153 |
|
|
47,369 |
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
As
of October 31, |
|
As
of January 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2005 |
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
2005 |
|
Cash,
cash equivalents and short term investments (U.S. treasury
securities) |
|
$ |
152,395 |
|
$ |
134,750 |
|
$ |
205,996 |
|
$ |
274,760 |
|
$ |
74,754 |
|
$ |
220,438 |
|
Working
capital |
|
|
156,796 |
|
|
143,998 |
|
|
218,423 |
|
|
276,173 |
|
|
71,576 |
|
|
226,803 |
|
Total
current assets |
|
|
178,866 |
|
|
160,792 |
|
|
234,739 |
|
|
289,225 |
|
|
79,405 |
|
|
245,451 |
|
Long-term
investments (U.S. treasury securities) |
|
|
--
|
|
|
18,690 |
|
|
14,542 |
|
|
15,773 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
10,999 |
|
Total
assets |
|
|
236,510 |
|
|
223,363 |
|
|
289,803 |
|
|
334,020 |
|
|
91,028 |
|
|
312,700 |
|
Total
current liabilities |
|
|
22,070 |
|
|
16,794 |
|
|
16,316 |
|
|
13,052 |
|
|
7,588 |
|
|
18,648 |
|
Total
non-current liabilities |
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
1,484 |
|
|
1,785 |
|
|
1,252 |
|
|
--
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
Total
shareholders’ equity |
|
|
212,964 |
|
|
205,085 |
|
|
271,702 |
|
|
319,716 |
|
|
83,251 |
|
|
292,835 |
|
Book
value per share(1) |
|
$ |
4.42 |
|
$ |
5.20 |
|
$ |
6.93 |
|
$ |
8.20 |
|
$ |
2.65 |
|
$ |
6.08 |
|
(1) Calculated
as total shareholder’s equity divided by common shares issued and outstanding as
of the balance sheet date.
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
(MD&A) is provided as a supplement to the accompanying financial statements
and footnotes to help provide an understanding of our financial condition,
changes in our financial condition and results of operations. The MD&A is
organized as follows:
Overview
and recent developments.
This section provides a general description of our business. We also briefly
summarize any significant events occurring subsequent to the close of the
reporting period.
Critical
accounting policies and estimates.
This section discusses those accounting policies and estimates that are both
considered important to our financial condition and operating results and
require significant judgment and estimates on the part of management in their
application.
Results
of operations.
This section provides an analysis of our results of operations for the years
ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, and the three months ended January 31,
2005 and 2004. In addition, a description is provided of transactions and events
that impact the comparability of the results being analyzed.
Liquidity
and capital resources.
This section provides an analysis of our cash position and cash
flows.
Recent
accounting pronouncements.
This section summarizes recent accounting pronouncements and their impact on the
company.
Factors
that may affect future results. In
this section, we detail risk factors that affect our quarterly and annual
results, but which are difficult to predict.
OVERVIEW
AND RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
Overview
FuelCell
is a world leader in the development and manufacture of fuel cell power plants
for clean, efficient and reliable electric power generation. We have been
developing fuel cell technology since our founding in 1969. We are currently
commercializing our core carbonate fuel cell products (Direct
FuelCell®
or DFC®
Power Plants), stationary applications for commercial and industrial customers,
and continuing to develop our next generation of carbonate fuel cell products.
In addition, we are beginning the development of another high temperature fuel
cell system, planar solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) technology, as a prime
contractor in the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solid State Energy
Conversion Alliance (SECA) Program and through our 42 percent ownership interest
in Versa Power Systems (Versa).
Direct
FuelCell Power Plants
Increasing
demand for reliable power worldwide, supplemented by air pollution concerns
caused by older, combustion power generation, and unreliable electrical grid
delivery systems present significant market opportunities for our core
distributed generation products. Our proprietary carbonate DFC power plants
electrochemically produce electricity directly from readily available
hydrocarbon fuels, such as natural gas and wastewater treatment gas. We
believe our products offer significant advantages compared to other power
generation technologies, including:
· |
Flexible
siting and permitting requirements; |
· |
Ability
to provide electricity and heat for cogeneration applications, such as
district heating, process steam, hot water and absorption chilling for air
conditioning; |
· |
Potentially
lower operating, maintenance and generation costs than alternative
distributed power generation technologies; and
|
· |
Because
our DFC power plants produce hydrogen from readily available fuels such as
natural gas and wastewater treatment gas, they can be used to
cost-effectively cogenerate hydrogen as well as electricity and
heat. |
Our
current products, the DFC300A, DFC1500 and DFC3000, are rated in capacity at 250
kW, 1 MW and 2 MW, respectively, and are scalable for distributed applications
up to 10 MW or larger. Our products are designed to meet the base load
power requirements of a wide range of commercial and industrial customers
including wastewater treatment plants (municipal, such as sewage treatment
facilities, and industrial, such as breweries and food processors), data
centers, manufacturing facilities, office buildings, hospitals, universities,
prisons, mail processing facilities and hotels, as well as in grid support
applications for utility customers. We are currently operating 29 power
plants that incorporate our DFC technology at customer sites throughout the
U.S., Europe and Japan. Through February 2005, more than 62 million kilowatt
hours of electricity have been generated by fuel cell power plants worldwide
incorporating our DFC technology. This is more than double the 27 million
kilowatt hours reported a year ago. Approximately 5 percent was generated from
our first megawatt DFC1500 power plant for King County. This increased operating
hours at customer sites has provided additional experience for improvement of
the performance and availability of DFC power plants. From January 2003 through
January 2005, the fleet availability for the our DFC power plants was 87
percent.
On
November 3, 2003, we completed our acquisition of Global located in Calgary,
Canada. At the time of the acquisition, Global had been developing SOFC power
plants since 1997 with the goal of commercializing its technology for
residential, commercial and light industrial applications ranging in size from 3
to 10 kW. Through its thermoelectric generator (TEG') product line, Global also
sold thermoelectric generators for use as a source of electrical power in remote
areas. In connection with the acquisition, we issued, in the aggregate,
approximately 8.2 million shares of our common stock and exchangeable shares,
the latter of which were issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd., our wholly-owned
Canadian subsidiary (formerly FCE Canada Inc.). We also assumed Global's Series
2 Preferred Shares. Total consideration for the acquisition was approximately
$94.8 million.
On
May 28, 2004, we sold Global's TEG business for proceeds of approximately $16
million. The sale of the TEG business was affected through a sale of all of the
outstanding common shares of Global. Prior to the sale, Global transferred
substantially all of its assets and liabilities not relating to its TEG business
(including substantially all of Global's assets and liabilities relating to its
SOFC business and substantially all of its cash) to FuelCell Energy, Ltd. In
addition, prior to the sale, the Global Series 2 Preferred Shares were cancelled
and replaced with substantially equivalent Class A cumulative redeemable
exchangeable preferred shares (which we refer to as the Series 1 preferred
shares) issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd.
On
October 31, 2004, we redeemed all of the approximately two million issued and
outstanding exchangeable shares issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The exchangeable
shares were redeemed in exchange for shares of our common stock on a one-for-one
basis. The redemption had no impact on the total number of shares of our common
stock deemed outstanding.
Recent
Developments
Preferred
Share Offering
On
November 11, 2004 we entered into a purchase agreement with Citigroup Global
Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc., and Lazard
Freres & Co., LLC (collectively referred to as the “Initial Purchasers”) for
the private placement under Rule 144A of up to 135,000 shares of our 5% Series B
Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (Liquidation Preference
$1,000). On November 17, 2004, we closed on the sale of 100,000 shares of Series
B preferred stock to the Initial Purchasers. Under the terms of the purchase
agreement, the Initial Purchasers were granted an over-allotment option to
purchase up to an additional 35,000 shares of Series B preferred stock through
January 25, 2005.
On
January 14, 2005, we sold an additional 5,875 shares of our Series B preferred
stock to the Initial Purchasers as part of the over-allotment option. Net
proceeds to us were approximately $99 million.
Sale
of Canadian Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Operation to Versa Power Systems,
Inc.
On
November 1, 2004, pursuant to an asset purchase agreement, dated October 19,
2004, by and among us, our wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary, FuelCell Energy,
Ltd., Versa Power Systems, Inc. (Versa), a Delaware corporation, and Versa Power
Systems, Ltd., a Canadian corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of Versa Power
Systems, Inc., FuelCell Energy, Ltd. transferred substantially all of its solid
oxide fuel cell (SOFC) assets and operations (including manufacturing and test
equipment, intellectual property and personnel) to Versa Power Systems, Ltd. In
exchange, we received 5,714 shares of Versa Power Systems, Inc. common stock,
increasing our ownership position in Versa to 7,714 shares, or 42 percent. No
cash was exchanged in the transaction.
Assets
sold to Versa totaled approximately $12.4 million and were classified as held
for sale on the balance sheet as of October 31, 2004. Upon closing of the sale
on November 1, 2004, our total investment in Versa was approximately $14.4
million and will be classified as “Equity investments”. We will account for this
investment under the equity method in future periods.
Pursuant
to the terms of the transaction, we expect to incur cash costs in the range of
approximately $1.0 million to $1.5 million related to severance and facility
consolidations in Calgary, Canada. Approximately
$0.1 million of this amount is related to severance payments to
employees paid
during the quarter ended October 31, 2004. The remaining payments are expected
to be made during fiscal year 2005. In
addition, we have
committed to paying future severance costs for time and service accrued up to
November 1, 2004 by employees that are moving to Versa in the event that they
are terminated by Versa
Power Systems, Ltd. (or its parent). Our liability for such severance costs is
limited to the
period commencing on November 1, 2004 through the earlier of (1) award of Phase
2 of the SECA
program
to FuelCell, (2) one year after completion of Phase 1 of the SECA program, or
(3) February 26, 2008. Subsequent to this period, Versa
Power Systems, Ltd. (or its parent) will be
responsible for the severance liability for such employees. We estimate this
liability at approximately $0.8 million.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Revenue
Recognition
We
contract with our customers to perform research and development or manufacture
and install fuel cell components and power plants under long-term contracts. We
recognize revenue on a method similar to the percentage-of-completion
method.
Revenues
on fuel cell research and development contracts are recognized proportionally as
costs are incurred and compared to the estimated total research and development
costs for each contract. In many cases, we are reimbursed only a portion of the
costs incurred or to be incurred on the contract. Revenues from government
funded research, development and demonstration programs are generally
multi-year, cost reimbursement and/or cost shared type contracts or cooperative
agreements. We are reimbursed for reasonable and allocable costs up to the
reimbursement limits set by the contract or cooperative agreement.
While
government research and development contracts may extend for many years, funding
is often provided incrementally on a year-by-year basis if contract terms are
met and Congress has authorized the funds. As of October 31, 2004 and January
31, 2005, research and development sales backlog totaled $16.4 million, of which
79 percent is funded, and $24.7 million, of which 58 percent is funded,
respectively. Should funding be temporarily delayed or if business initiatives
change, we may choose to devote resources to other activities, including
internally funded research and development.
Fuel
cell product sales and revenues include revenues from product sales and service
contracts. Revenues from fuel cell product sales are recognized proportionally
as costs are incurred and assigned to a customer contract by comparing the
estimated total manufacture and installation costs for each contract to the
total contract value. Revenues from service contracts are recognized ratably
over the contract term while costs are expensed as incurred. As our fuel cell
products are in their initial stages of development and market acceptance,
actual costs incurred could differ materially from those previously estimated.
Once we have established that our fuel cell products have achieved commercial
market acceptance and future costs can be reasonably estimated, then estimated
costs to complete an individual contract, in excess of revenue, will be accrued
immediately upon identification.
Warrant
Value Recognition
Warrants
have been issued as sales incentives to certain of our business partners. These
warrants vest as orders from our business partners exceed stipulated levels.
Should warrants vest, or when management estimates that it is probable that
warrants will vest, we will record a proportional amount of the fair value of
the warrants against related revenue as a sales discount. During the three
months ended April 30, 2004, a tranche of 200,000 warrants issued to one of our
business partners vested with the receipt of a 4 MW order. The fair value of
these warrants was determined to be $0.5 million. This has been recorded as
other current assets on the consolidated balance sheet with the offsetting entry
to additional paid in capital. In accordance with our warrant value recognition
policy, as we recognize the associated revenue for orders placed in accordance
with these sales agreements, a proportional amount of the fair value of the
warrants will be recorded against the revenue as a sales discount. To date,
approximately $0.1 million of sales discounts have been recognized.
Inventories
During
the procurement and manufacturing process of a fuel cell power plant, costs for
material, labor and overhead are accumulated in raw materials and
work-in-process (WIP) inventory until they are transferred to a customer
contract.
Our
inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market price. As we sell products
at or below cost, we provide for a lower of cost or market (LCM) adjustment to
the cost basis of inventory. This adjustment is estimated by comparing the
current sales prices of our power plants to estimated costs of completed power
plants. In certain circumstances, for long-lead time items, we will make advance
payments to vendors for future inventory deliveries, which are recorded as a
component of other current assets on the consolidated balance sheet. We also
provide for a LCM adjustment to the advance payments to vendors.
As
of January 31, 2005 and October 31, 2004, the LCM adjustment to cost basis of
inventory and advance payments to vendors was approximately $8.4 million and
$12.4 million respectively, each of which equates to a reduction of
approximately 36 and 42 percent respectively of the inventory value. As of
October 31, 2004, our balance of plant inventory and advances to vendors had
increased over the prior year-end due to our current production schedule.
However, as of January 31, 2005, our gross balance of plant and advances to
vendors balances declined from the October 31, 2004 balances due to plants being
completed for customer orders. As inventory levels increase or decrease,
appropriate adjustments to cost basis are made.
Internal
Research and Development Expenses
We
conduct internally funded research and development activities to improve current
or anticipated product performance and reduce product life-cycle costs. These
costs are classified as research and development expenses on our statements of
operations.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Management
evaluates the results of operations and cash flows using a variety of key
performance indicators. Indicators that management uses include revenues
compared to prior periods and internal forecasts, costs of our products and
results of our “cost-out” initiatives, and operating cash use. These are
discussed throughout the ‘Results of Operations’ and ‘Liquidity and Capital
Resources’ sections contained under the heading “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
Comparison
of the Years Ended October 31, 2004 and October 31,
2003
Revenues
and costs of revenues
The
following tables summarize our revenue and cost mix for the years ended October
31, 2004 and 2003 respectively (dollar amounts in thousands):
|
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2004 |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2003 |
|
Percentage
Increase
/ |
|
Revenues: |
|
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Revenues |
|
Product
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Revenues |
|
(Decrease) in
Revenues |
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
18,750 |
|
|
60 |
%
|
$ |
17,709 |
|
|
52 |
% |
|
6 |
% |
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
12,636
|
|
|
40 |
% |
|
16,081
|
|
|
48 |
% |
|
(21 |
%) |
Total |
|
$ |
31,386 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
33,790 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
(7 |
%) |
|
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2004 |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2003 |
|
Percentage
Increase / |
|
Cost
of revenues: |
|
Costs
of
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs of
Revenues |
|
Costs
of
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs of
Revenues |
|
(Decrease)
in
Costs of Revenues |
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
27,290 |
|
|
41 |
%
|
$ |
35,827 |
|
|
42 |
% |
|
(24 |
%) |
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
39,961 |
|
|
59 |
% |
|
50,391 |
|
|
58 |
% |
|
(21 |
%) |
Total |
|
$ |
67,251 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
86,21 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
(22 |
%) |
Total
revenues for the year ended October 31, 2004 decreased by $2.4 million, or 7
percent, to $31.4 million from $33.8 million during the same period last year.
The components of our revenues and cost of revenues are further described as
follows:
Research
and development contracts
Revenue
from research and development contracts will vary from year to year depending on
government funding levels, new contracts and work on existing contracts. Revenue
from research and development contracts increased 6 percent during the year
ended October 31, 2004 to $18.8 million from $17.7 million in same period of the
prior year.
Revenues have increased on the Vision 21 and Solid State Energy Conversion
Alliance (SECA) contracts with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
These increases were offset by lower revenue from the Clean Coal contract as the
installation phase for this two megawatt DFC3000 power plant was completed.
The
cost of research and development contract revenue declined by $8.5 million for
the year ended October 31, 2004 (fiscal 2004) compared to the prior year due to
the mix of cost shared contracts and reduced costs for the Clean Coal,
Product
Design Improvement (PDI), and King County
contracts as major tasks were completed on those contracts. The
ratio of costs to contract revenues was 1.5 to 1, which decreased from 2.0 to 1
when compared to the same period of the prior year. The primary driver of the
improved cost ratio was increased funding for the PDI program during fiscal
2004. Significant cost share contracts in fiscal 2004 included Clean Coal, PDI,
Vision 21, King County, Navy Phase II and SECA. We
concluded work on the PDI contract during the quarter ended October 31, 2004 and
do not expect significant future revenues or costs related to this
contract.
For
strategic reasons, we currently plan to continue to participate in government
cost share contracts that advance the development of fuel cells. As a result, we
expect that costs on these contracts will be higher than revenues
received.
Fuel
cell product sales and revenues and product costs
Fuel
cell product sales were $12.6 million for the year ended October 31, 2004
compared to $16.1 million in the same period of a year ago. The lower product
sales and revenues were due to production scheduling for customer requirements
and production on power plants for power purchase agreements where product
revenues are not recognized until power is sold to the customer over an extended
term. Power plant production was at approximately the same level as the prior
year (6 MW). As of October 31, 2004, product sales backlog totaled approximately
$26.3 million, compared to $14.4 million as of October 31, 2003. This backlog
does not include 1.5 MW of orders for power purchase agreements for Santa
Barbara and Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.
Product
costs decreased with lower revenue to $40.0 million from $50.4 million. The
ratio of costs to revenue increased slightly from 3.1 to 3.2 to 1 over the prior
year due to costs totaling approximately $2.0 million associated with the power
purchase agreements noted above. This increase was partially offset by lower
overall product costs recognized on power plants built in 2004 when compared to
the prior year due to progress on our cost out program.
Our
products do not ship on an even production schedule. The shipment date to
customers depends on a number of factors that are outside of our control,
including siting requirements, construction and permits. We do not have the
sales or order history to quantify trends as of yet.
Administrative
and selling expenses
Excluding
costs from our Canadian SOFC operations, administrative and selling expenses
increased by $1.1 million or 9 percent, to $13.7 million during the year ended
October 31, 2004 compared to $12.6 million in the prior year. Approximately $0.8
million of this increase was due to increased sales and marketing expenses and
$0.2 million was due to higher investor relations costs related to our increased
shareholder base. In addition, we incurred $1.2 million of administrative and
selling expenses in our Canadian SOFC operations as a result of our acquisition
during the year ended October 31, 2004. We do not expect to incur any
significant administrative and selling expenses related to the Canadian SOFC
operation in our fiscal year ending October 31, 2005 (fiscal 2005) as it was
sold effective November 1, 2004.
Research
and development expenses
Excluding
costs from our Canadian SOFC operations, research and development expenses
increased to $17.6 million during year ended October 31, 2004 compared to $8.5
million recorded in 2003. The increase is due to continued focus on our
“cost-out” program (implemented in fiscal 2003), product documentation and
engineering support for products in the field. During fiscal 2004, we expanded
our cost out program by hiring additional engineering employees. Our cost-out
program is
expected to: reduce material costs, simplify design, improve manufacturing
yields, reduce product assembly labor, and reduce production cycle time of our
DFC products.
In addition, we incurred $9.0 million of research and development expenses in
our Canadian SOFC operations as a result of our acquisition during the year
ended October 31, 2004. We
do not expect to incur any significant research and development expenses related
to the Canadian SOFC operation in fiscal 2005, as it was sold effective November
1, 2004.
Purchased
in-process research and development
The
$12.2 million in-process research and development (IPR&D) charge relates to
SOFC technology acquired in the Global transaction. In 1997, Global began
developing SOFC technology, which is still in development. The $12.2 million
allocated to IPR&D was determined using two established valuation
techniques. An average of the cost valuation and market valuation approaches
were used to determine the IPR&D amount. The amounts estimated in this
valuation were calculated using a risk-adjusted discount rate of 30 percent. As
the acquired technology has not yet reached technological feasibility and no
alternative future uses existed, it was expensed upon acquisition in accordance
with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 2, “Accounting for
Research and Development Costs.”
The
IPR&D acquired was related to one project, the development of a solid oxide
fuel cell. Prior to the transaction date, Global spent approximately five years
developing this technology. In 2003, we received notice of an award to
participate in the DOE’s ten-year SECA program to develop low cost solid oxide
fuel cells for residential, commercial, and light industrial applications. We
currently estimate that it will take approximately five to ten years to complete
the development. The SECA program is a cost-share program totaling approximately
$139 million. This technology was subsequently sold to our partner in the SECA
program, Versa, along with fixed assets in exchange for stock, which increased
our ownership in Versa to approximately 42 percent.
Loss
from operations
The
loss from operations for the year ended October 31, 2004 totaled $89.6 million
compared to the $73.6 million recorded in 2003. The loss from operations for the
year ended October 31, 2004 totaled $67.2 million compared to the $73.6 million
recorded in 2003 or a reduction of approximately 9 percent excluding the
Canadian SOFC operation. The reduction in operating loss was due to lower cost
of research and development and product revenues partially offset by increased
administrative, selling and internal research and development costs.
We
expect to incur operating losses in future reporting periods as we continue to
participate in government cost share programs, sell products
at prices lower than our current production costs, and
invest in our “cost out” initiatives.
As a result of selling our Canadian SOFC operations, we expect to reduce our
annual cash use by approximately $10.0 million. The
Global and SOFC operations were part of Global, which was acquired by us in
November 2003, thus there are no comparable periods of the prior
year.
Interest
and other income, net
Interest
and other income, net, declined by $3.5 million when comparing the fiscal year
ended October 31, 2004 to the prior year. During the year ended October 31,
2003, we realized Connecticut state research and development incentives totaling
$3.4 million. We did not realize tax incentives during the year ended October
31, 2004 although we have applied for approximately $1.5 million of such
credits. During the year ended October 31, 2004, we realized foreign currency
gains totaling approximately $0.5 million, which offset a decline (compared to
the prior year) of interest income totaling approximately $0.9 million. The
reduction in interest income is due to reduced average interest rates on the
invested cash.
Provision
for income taxes
We
believe, that due to our efforts to commercialize our DFC technology, we will
continue to incur losses. Based on projections for future taxable income over
the period in which the deferred tax assets are realizable, management believes
that significant uncertainty exists surrounding the recoverability of the
deferred tax assets. Therefore, no tax benefit has been recognized related to
current year losses and other deferred tax assets.
Discontinued
operations, net of tax
Discontinued
operations reflects the net income of $0.8 million of the TEG business segment
that was sold on May 28, 2004. Refer also to Note 2 - Discontinued Operations of
our consolidated financial statements. The Global TEG business segment was
acquired by us in November 2003, thus there are no results from discontinued
operations in the comparable period of the prior year.
Comparison
of the Years Ended October 31, 2003 and October 31,
2002
Revenues
and cost of revenues
The
following tables summarize our revenue and cost mix for the years ended October
31, 2003 and 2002, respectively (dollar amounts in thousands):
Revenues: |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2003 |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2002 |
|
Percentage
Increase / |
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Revenues |
|
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Revenues |
|
(Decrease) in
Revenues |
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
17,709 |
|
|
52 |
%
|
$ |
33,575 |
|
|
81 |
% |
|
(47 |
%) |
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
16,081 |
|
|
48 |
% |
|
7,656 |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
110 |
% |
Total |
|
$ |
33,790 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
41,231 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
(18 |
%) |
Cost
of revenues: |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2003 |
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2002 |
|
Percentage |
|
|
|
Cost
of Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs
of Revenues |
|
Cost
of Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs
of Revenues |
|
in
Cost |
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
35,827 |
|
|
42 |
%
|
$ |
45,664 |
|
|
59 |
% |
|
(22 |
%) |
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
50,391 |
|
|
58 |
% |
|
32,129 |
|
|
41 |
% |
|
57 |
% |
Total |
|
$ |
86,218 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
77,793 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
11 |
% |
Total
revenues for the year ended October 31, 2003 decreased by $7.4 million or 18
percent, to $33.8 million from $41.2 million during the prior year. This
decrease in total revenues was comprised of a 47 percent decrease in government
research and development contracts partially offset by a 110 percent increase in
product sales revenue.
Research
and development contracts
Fiscal
2002 research and development contract revenue included a large portion of our
one-megawatt and two megawatt power plants for King County, Washington and Clean
Coal, respectively. Combined revenue on these contracts was lower in 2003. Also,
in 2003, under budgetary constraints, funding from the U.S. government for
certain of our other contracts was delayed.
Cost
of research and development contracts decreased to $35.8 million during the year
ended October 31, 2003, compared to $45.7 million during fiscal 2002. The
decrease was partially due to completion of tasks on the King County, Washington
project and delayed funding on certain government contracts. While our funding
was reduced due to timing and budgetary constraints, we continue to participate
in cost-share contracts and invest in developing fuel cell technology. Our
significant cost share contracts during fiscal 2003 included Clean
Coal, Department of Energy, King County, and Navy Phase II. The
ratio of costs to contract revenues increased in 2003 as the mix of cost-share
contracts increased during the year.
Product
sales and revenues
The
fiscal 2003 increase in product sales revenue was related to increased
manufacturing and delivery of our DFC300A power plants for both our distribution
partners and direct customers. As a percent of total revenues, product revenues
comprised 48 percent compared to 19 percent in the prior year as we continue to
focus our business initiatives on the manufacture and delivery of our fuel cell
products.
Cost
of product sales and revenues increased to $50.3 million during the year ended
October 31, 2003 compared to $32.1 million during the prior year. This increase
was due to additional product sales recorded during the year. The ratio of costs
to contract revenues decreased in 2003 as we have reduced overall product costs
through our “cost-out” initiatives and incurred less “first time” costs
including qualifying multiple vendors for materials and components.
Administrative
and selling expenses
Administrative
and selling expenses increased by 21 percent, to $12.6 million during the year
ended October 31, 2003 compared to $10.5 million in the prior year. This
increase was primarily comprised of higher business insurance costs, sales and
marketing salaries and franchise taxes.
Research
and development expenses
Research
and development expenses increased 25 percent, to $8.5 million during the year
ended October 31, 2003 compared to the $6.8 million recorded in fiscal 2002.
This increase is primarily due to increased investment in development costs
associated with the design, engineering, fabrication and installation of our
products.
Loss
from operations
The
net result of our revenues and costs was a loss from operations during the year
ended October 31, 2003 totaling $73.6 million. This operating loss is
approximately 37 percent higher than the $53.8 million loss recorded in fiscal
2002. We continue to invest in the standardization of our DFC power plants. For
strategic reasons, we also continue to participate in government cost share
contracts to advance the development of fuel cells. These factors contributed to
our operating loss. Other factors impacting the operating loss included reduced
funding on certain government contracts, development of our distribution
network, and increases in operating costs including depreciation on new
production equipment, business insurance premiums, information systems and
infrastructure.
Interest
and other income, net
Interest
and other income, net, increased by 23 percent, to $6.0 million during
the year ended October 31, 2003 compared to the $4.9 million recorded in fiscal
2002.
We have participated in a program available from the State of Connecticut that
allows certain taxpayers to exchange the amount of research and development
credits generated during a taxable year for cash to be received over a
three-year period. The increase to interest and other income, net was due, in
part, to tax credits generated in fiscal years 2001 and 2002 totaling $3.4
million being recorded in fiscal 2003. There were no tax credits recorded during
fiscal 2002. Interest income for the year declined by $2.3 million or 47 percent
as a result of reduced interest rates and lower cash and investment balances
compared to the prior year.
Taxes
We
believe that due to our efforts to commercialize our DFC technology, we have and
will continue to incur losses. Based on projections for future taxable income
over the period in which the deferred tax assets are realizable, management
believes that significant uncertainty exists surrounding the recoverability of
the deferred tax assets. Therefore, no tax benefit has been recognized related
to current year losses and other deferred tax assets.
Comparison
of Three Months ended January 31, 2005 and January 31,
2004
Revenues
and costs of revenues
The
following tables summarize our revenue mix for the three months ended January
31, 2005 and 2004 (dollar amounts in thousands), respectively:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, 2005 |
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, 2004 |
|
Percentage
Increase
/ |
|
Revenues: |
|
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Product Revenues |
|
Product
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Product Revenues |
|
(Decrease)
in
Product Revenues |
|
Fuel
cell product sales and revenues |
|
$ |
5,032 |
|
|
67 |
%
|
$ |
2,028 |
|
|
27 |
% |
|
148 |
% |
Research
and development contracts |
|
|
2,522 |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
5,366 |
|
|
73 |
% |
|
(53 |
%) |
Total |
|
$ |
7,554 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
7,394 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
2 |
% |
|
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, 2005 |
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, 2004 |
|
Percentage
Increase
/ |
|
Cost
of revenues: |
|
Costs
of
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs of
Revenues |
|
Costs
of
Revenues |
|
Percent of
Costs of
Revenues |
|
(Decrease)
in
Costs of Revenues |
|
Fuel
cell product sales and revenues |
|
$ |
13,713 |
|
|
83 |
%
|
$ |
7,623 |
|
|
51 |
% |
|
80 |
% |
Research
and development contracts |
|
|
2,814 |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
7,471 |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
(62 |
%) |
Total |
|
$ |
16,527 |
|
|
100 |
% |
$ |
15,094 |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
9 |
% |
Total
revenues for the three months ended January 31, 2005 increased by $0.2 million,
or 2 percent, to $7.6 million from $7.4 million during the same period last
year.
Fuel
cell product sales and revenues
Fuel
cell product sales and revenue increased
$3.0 million to $5.0 million for the three months ended January 31, 2005,
compared to $2.0 million for the same period in 2004. As
of January 31, 2005, our fuel cell product sales backlog totaled approximately
$22.9 million, up from $16.3 million in the same period a year ago. Included in
these figures are $1.4 million and $0.7 million, respectively, related to
long-term service agreements.
Cost
of product sales and revenues increased to $13.7 million during the three months
ended January 31, 2005 compared to $7.6 million during the same period of the
prior year.
Included in cost of sales during the three
months ended January 31, 2005 was a
non-cash fixed asset impairment charge totaling $0.9 million. This was related
to a planned change in manufacturing processes that is expected to increase
electrical output (“uprate”) for improved product performance and reduced cost
in future periods.
The
increase in product sales and revenues and costs of product sales and revenues
was due to primarily to the progress on power plants for Marubeni and Chevron
Energy Solutions customers as well as DFC component shipments for MTU CFC
Solutions, GmbH. The
ratio of product cost to sales improved from 3.8-to-1 during the three months
ended January 31, 2004 compared to 2.5-to-1 during the three
months ended January 31, 2005 when adjusted
for the one-time asset impairment charge described above. This ratio is
inclusive of costs related to power purchase agreements that had no
corresponding revenues as if they were equipment sales. The ratio of costs to
product sales improved from the same quarter of a year ago as we recognized
savings related to its cost out program.
We
expect to continue to sell our DFC products at prices lower than our production
costs until such time as we are able to reduce product costs through our
engineering and manufacturing efforts and production volumes increase.
Research
and development contracts
Research
and development revenue decreased
$3.0 million to $2.5 million for the three months ended January 31, 2005,
compared to $5.4 million for the same period in 2004.
Cost of research and development contracts decreased to $2.8 million during the
three months ended January 31, 2005, compared to $7.5 million for the same
period in 2004.
Research
and development contract revenues and costs declined with the completion of the
U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Product Design Improvement and Bath Iron
Works contracts, and lower revenues on the Clean Coal and U.S. Navy contracts.
Research and development contract revenue and costs were primarily related to
SOFC development under the DOE’s Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance Program,
the combined cycle Direct FuelCell/Turbine® development under DOE’s Vision 21
program, and the Ship Service Fuel Cell contract with the U.S. Navy. The ratio
of research and development cost to revenue improved over the same quarter a
year ago due to the current mix of cost share contracts. As of January 31, 2005,
our research and development sales backlog totaled approximately $24.7 million
of which Congress has authorized funding of $14.4 million. This compares
to research and development sales backlog totaling $25.7 million
($14.8 million funded) as of January 31, 2004.
Administrative
and selling expenses
Administrative
and selling expenses decreased by 26 percent, to $3.1 million during the three
months ended January 31, 2005 compared to $3.7 million in the same period of the
prior year. This decrease was primarily due to our acquisition of Global in
2003, which had increased the fiscal year 2004 amount by approximately $0.8
million and which was subsequently divested. We do not expect to incur any
significant administrative and selling expenses related to the Canadian SOFC
operation in our fiscal year ending October 31, 2005, as it was sold effective
in November 1, 2004.
Research
and development expenses
Research
and development expenses decreased, to $5.2 million during the three months
ended January 31, 2005 compared to $5.9 million recorded in the same period of
the prior year. This decreases was primarily due to the combining of our
Canadian SOFC operations with Versa Power Systems (Versa). We do not expect to
incur any significant research and development expenses related to the Canadian
SOFC operation in our fiscal year ending October 31, 2005, as it was sold
effective in November 1, 2004.
Purchased
in-process research and development
We
recorded a charge totaling $12.2 million during the three months ended January
31, 2004 for in-process research and development acquired in the Global
transaction. In 1997, Global began developing SOFC technology, which is still in
development. Global's SOFC is a ceramic planar (flat, square or rectangular)
cell, with a solid electrolyte that is anode supported (the thickest component
to which all other materials are subsequently mounted) and conducts oxygen ions.
Global has developed a proprietary microstructure that gives its fuel cells very
high power densities (the amount of power measured in watts per square
centimeter of surface area).
The
$12.2 million allocated to in-process research and development (IPR&D) was
determined using established valuation techniques through a qualified third
party valuation. As the SOFC technology is in the early stages of development,
the valuation was based, in part, on the cost approach. The cost approach was
used because the SOFC technology, while demonstrating substance, is nonetheless
so early in its development cycle that reliable forecasts of future benefit do
not exist. The valuation also used the market approach as a second method to
estimate the implied value of the SOFC business line, by estimating the fair
value of the generator product line, adding net cash assumed in the acquisition,
and then subtracting this total amount from the cash and stock consideration
paid, giving effect to the stage of completion at the acquisition date. An
average of these two valuation techniques was used to determine the IPR&D
amount. The amounts estimated in this valuation were calculated using a
risk-adjusted discount rate of 30 percent. As the acquired technology had not
yet reached technological feasibility and no alternative future uses exist, it
was expensed upon acquisition in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 2, “Accounting for Research and Development
Costs.”
The
acquisition had no impact on consolidated costs for the three month period
ending January 31, 2005.
Loss
from operations
The
net result of our revenues and costs was a loss from operations for the three
months ended January 31, 2005 totaling $17.3 million. This operating loss is
approximately 41 percent lower than the $29.5 million loss recorded in the
comparable period last year due primarily to the acquisition related charge of
purchased in-process research and development in the prior year totaling $12.2
million.
Other
factors impacting the operating loss included reduced funding on certain
government contracts, development of our distribution network, and increases in
operating costs including depreciation on new production equipment, business
insurance premiums, information systems and infrastructure. We expect to incur
operating losses in future reporting periods as we continue to participate in
government cost share programs, sell products
at prices lower than our current production costs, and
invest in our “cost out” initiatives.
Interest
and other income, net
Interest
and other income, net, was $0.9 million for the three months ended January 31,
2005, unchanged compared to the same period of the prior year. Interest income
increased from $0.6 million to $0.9 million due to higher cash balances and
interest rates. This increase was offset by a lower net foreign currency gain
totaling approximately $0.3 million. We recognized approximately $0.03 million
in foreign currency loss and $0.3 million in foreign currency gain during the
three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Discontinued
operations, net of tax
During
the three months ended January 31, 2005 we exited certain facilities in Canada
and as a result recorded fixed asset impairment charges totaling approximately
$0.9 million. In addition, we incurred approximately $0.4 million of exit costs
related to these facilities which resulted in total loss from discontinued
operations of approximately $1.3 million.
During
fiscal 2004, we acquired, Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global) and subsequently
divested its generator business unit through the sale of Global on May 28, 2004.
As a result, historical results were reclassified as discontinued operations.
Income, net of taxes related to the generator business totaled approximately
$0.7 million for the three months ended January 31, 2004.
Provision
for income taxes
We
believe that due to our efforts to commercialize our DFC technology, we will
continue to incur losses. Based on projections for future taxable income over
the period in which the deferred tax assets are realizable, management believes
that significant uncertainty exists surrounding the recoverability of the
deferred tax assets. Therefore, no tax benefit has been recognized related to
current or prior year losses and other deferred tax assets.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
We
had approximately $152.4 million of cash, cash equivalents and investments as of
October 31, 2004 compared to $153.4 million as of October 31, 2003. Net
cash and investments used during the year was $1.0 million, consisting of
approximately $70 million used in operations offset by $69 million of cash and
investments received in the Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global) transactions.
Cash used during the year included approximately $10.9 million related to our
Canadian operations. As our Canadian operations were sold in fiscal 2004, we
expect reduced cash use in Canada in future periods.
Subsequent
to our fiscal year end, we received net proceeds of approximately $93.5 million
from our preferred stock sale, which closed on November 17, 2004.
We
had approximately $231.4 million of cash, cash equivalents and investments as of
January 31, 2005. Net
cash and investments provided during the past three months was $79.0 million,
consisting of approximately $99.0 million from the sale of preferred stock,
offset by approximately $19.0 million used for continuing operations, and
approximately $1.0 million used in our discontinued Canadian
operations.
Sources
and Uses of Cash and Investments
We
continue to invest in new product development and bringing our products to
market and, as such, we are not currently generating positive cash flow from our
operations. Our operations are funded primarily through sales of equity
securities and cash generated from operations. Cash from operations includes
revenue from government research and development contracts, product sales,
license fees and interest income. Our future cash requirements depend on
numerous factors including future involvement in research and development
contracts, implementing our cost reduction efforts on our fuel cell products and
increasing annual order volume.
Future
involvement in research and development contracts
Our
research and development contracts are generally multi-year, cost reimbursement
type contracts. The majority of these are U.S. Government contracts that
are dependent upon the government’s continued allocation of funds and may be
terminated in whole or in part at the convenience of the government. We will
continue to seek research and development contracts. To obtain these contracts,
we must continue to prove the benefits of our technologies and be successful in
our competitive bidding.
Implementing
our cost reduction efforts on our fuel cell products
We
believe that reducing product cost is essential for us to penetrate the market
for our fuel cell products and is critical to achieving profitability. We
believe this will reduce and/or eliminate the need for incentive funding
programs that are currently available to allow our product pricing to compete
with grid-delivered power and other distributed generation technologies. In
2003, we began a “cost-out” program that focuses on three key
areas:
· |
increased
performance output; |
· |
increased
stack life; and |
· |
design
simplification and materials replacement and/or elimination to reduce
product cost. |
Increasing
annual order volume
We
believe that increased production volumes will spread fixed costs over more
units of production, resulting in a lower per unit cost. Our manufacturing,
testing and conditioning facilities have equipment in place to accommodate 50 MW
of annual production. Our multi-disciplined cost reduction program is expected
to significantly reduce our product costs over time. We currently believe
that we can achieve operating break-even at annual production volumes of
approximately 100 MW. Our fiscal 2004 production volume was approximately 6
MW.
We
anticipate that our existing capital resources, together with anticipated
revenues, will be adequate to satisfy our planned financial requirements and
agreements through at least the next twelve months.
Cash
Inflows and Outflows
Year
Ended October 31, 2004
During
year ended October 31, 2004, total cash and cash equivalents and investments
decreased by $1.0 million, compared with a decrease of $67.1 million during the
year ended October 31, 2003. In fiscal 2004, we had a net cash use of
approximately $70.0 million offset by cash and investments acquired in the
Global acquisition and subsequent disposition (net of fees) totaling $69.0
million.
The
key components of our cash inflows and outflows from continuing operations were
as follows:
Operating
Activities:
During the year ended October 31, 2004, we used $64.6 million in cash in our
operating activities, which consists of a net loss for the period of
approximately $86.4 million, offset by non-cash adjustments totaling $20.6
million, cash generated from working capital of approximately $2.0 million and
income from discontinued operations of approximately $.8 million. This
compares to an operating cash usage of $58.8 million during the year ended
October 31, 2003.
Accounts
Receivable
Accounts
receivable as of October 31, 2004 increased by approximately $2.7 million from
October 31, 2003 due to approximately $3.2 million more in product receivables
offset by a decline of government accounts receivable totaling $0.5 million. The
increase in product receivables is due to greater milestone billings to
customers consistent with the expanded product backlog. We bill our fuel cell
contracts based upon certain milestones that generally commence with contract
signing and extend to commissioning of a completed power plant. We generally
bill our government contracts on a monthly basis as costs are incurred. As
revenues increase or decrease, billings and accounts receivable will increase or
decrease as well.
Accounts
Payable and Accrued Expenses
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses combined have increased by approximately $2.7
million since October 31, 2003 due to the timing of inventory payments related
to our current production schedule. In addition we had accrued approximately
$0.8 million in severance costs as of October 31, 2004 related to our sale of
the SOFC business to Versa.
Investing
Activities: We
acquired Global on November 3, 2003 by issuing, in total, approximately 8.2
million common and exchangeable shares. In connection with the
acquisition, we acquired $55.8 million of cash and investments. The cash
acquired from Global was offset by approximately $2.8 million of transaction and
professional fees. In May 2004, we completed our sale of the Global entity and
its TEG product line for net proceeds of approximately $16.0 million.
Capital
expenditures for the year ended October 31, 2004 were approximately $7.9 million
compared to $6.6 million in the prior period. Reductions in systems and
infrastructure spending during fiscal 2004 have been offset by capital
expenditures totaling approximately $4.7 million related to power plants being
built for power purchase agreements. In addition, there were capital
expenditures totaling approximately $1.0 million relating to one DFC300A that we
have provided to the Department of Defense (DoD) Fuel Cell Test and Evaluation
Center (FCTec).
Financing
Activities: During
the year ended October 31, 2004, we generated $2.7 million from financing
activities through the exercise of stock options, partially offset by repayments
of debt and preferred dividends. This compares with $0.5 million generated
in the year ended October 31, 2003.
Three
Months Ended January 31, 2005
During
three months ended January 31, 2005, total cash and cash equivalents and
investments increased by $79.0 million. During the quarter cash increased by
approximately $99.0 million as a result of our Series B Convertible share
offering which was offset by net cash use totaling $20 million.
The
key components of our cash inflows and outflows from continuing operations were
as follows:
Operating
Activities:
During the three months ended January 31, 2005, we used $16.7 million in cash in
our operating activities, which consists of a net loss for the period of
approximately $18.0 million, offset by non-cash adjustments totaling $3.2
million, cash used in working capital of approximately $2.0 million and loss
from discontinued operations of approximately $1.3 million. This compares
to an operating cash usage of $13.5 million during the three months ended
January 31, 2004.
. |
Investing
Activities: During
the three months ended January 31, 2005, net cash provided by investing
activities totaled $40.6 million. Capital expenditures totaled $3.3
million for the three months ended January 31, 2005. This included $2.8
million for equipment being built for power purchase agreements in our
Alliance entities. During the quarter approximately $59.2 million of
investments in U.S. Treasury Securities matured with new treasury
purchases totaling $15.4 million. Subsequent to January 31, 2005 we
invested approximately $90 million of money market funds in U.S.
Treasuries in order to increase investment yield. This compares with
approximately $54.4 million generated in the three months ended January
31, 2004. During the quarter ended January 31, 2004 we acquired Global
Thermoelectric, Inc. which resulted in a net increase to cash totaling
$53.0 million. |
. |
Financing
Activities: During
the three months ended January 31, 2005 we closed on a Series B cumulative
convertible preferred perpetual preferred stock offering which resulted in
net proceeds to us totaling $99.0 million. We generated $0.2 million from
financing activities through the exercise of stock options, partially
offset by repayments of debt totaling approximately $0.1 million.
This compares with approximately $0.8 million generated in the three
months ended January 31, 2004. |
Commitments
and Significant Contractual Obligations
Year
Ended October 31, 2004
A
summary of our significant future commitments and contractual obligations as of
October 31, 2004 and the related payments by fiscal year is summarized as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
Payments
Due by Period |
|
Contractual
Obligation: |
|
Total |
|
Less
than
1
Year |
|
1
- 3
Years |
|
3
- 5
Years |
|
More
than
5
Years |
|
Lease
commitments(1) |
|
$ |
5,222 |
|
$ |
1,328 |
|
$ |
1,751 |
|
$ |
1,545 |
|
$ |
598 |
|
Term
loan (principal and interest) |
|
|
1,580
|
|
|
433
|
|
|
864
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
-- |
|
Purchase
commitments(2) |
|
|
14,855
|
|
|
14,734
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Preferred
dividends payable
(3) (4) |
|
|
20,452
|
|
|
379
|
|
|
758
|
|
|
758 |
|
|
18,557 |
|
Totals |
|
$ |
42,109 |
|
$ |
16,874 |
|
$ |
3,494 |
|
$ |
2,586 |
|
$ |
19,155 |
|
(1) |
Future
minimum lease payments on capital and operating
leases. |
(2) |
Short-term
purchase commitments with suppliers for materials supplies, and services
incurred in the normal course of business. |
(3) |
Quarterly
dividends of Cdn.$312,500 accrue on the Series 1 preferred shares (subject
to possible reduction pursuant to the terms of the Series 1 preferred
shares on account of increases in the price of FuelCell’s common stock).
We have agreed to pay a minimum of Cdn.$500,000 in cash or common stock
annually to Enbridge, Inc., the holder of the Series 1 preferred shares,
so long as Enbridge holds the shares. Interest accrues on cumulative
unpaid dividends at a 2.45 percent quarterly rate, compounded quarterly,
until payment thereof. Cumulative unpaid dividends and interest at October
31, 2004 were approximately $2.8 million. For the purposes of this
disclosure, we have assumed that the minimum dividend payments would be
made through 2010. In 2010, we would be required to pay any unpaid and
accrued dividends. From 2010 through 2020, we would be required to pay
annual dividend amounts totaling Cdn.$1.25
million. |
(4) |
We
have assumed a constant exchange rate for the purposes of this disclosure
at 0.76 U.S. dollars to 1.0 Canadian
dollar. |
On
June 29, 2000, we entered into a loan agreement, secured by machinery and
equipment, and have borrowed an aggregate of $2.2 million under the agreement.
The loan is payable over seven years, with payments of interest only for the
first six months and then repaid in monthly installments over the remaining six
and one-half years with interest computed annually based on the ten-year U.S.
Treasury note plus 2.5 percent. Our current interest rate at July 31, 2004 is
7.2 percent and the outstanding principal balance on this loan is approximately
$1.5 million.
Approximately
$0.6 million of our cash and cash equivalents have been pledged as collateral
for certain banking relationships in which we participate.
Research
and Development Cost-Share Contracts
We
have contracted with various government agencies as either a prime contractor or
sub-contractor on cost-share contracts and agreements. Cost-share terms require
that participating contractors share the total cost of the project in an agreed
ratio with the government agency. For example, our DOE sponsored demonstration
of our two-megawatt DFC 3000 power plant operating on synthesis gas derived from
coal has a total project value of $34.5 million. The DOE will reimburse us 50
percent of the cost on this project and we will incur the balance. Thus, over
the life of this program and assuming that funding is approved annually by
Congress, our share of the total research and development expenditures would be
approximately $17.3 million for this program. As of October 31, 2004, our
research and development sales backlog totaled $16.4 million. As this backlog is
funded in future periods, we will incur additional research and development
cost-share totaling approximately $15.5 million for which we would not be
reimbursed by the government.
Product
Sales Contracts
Our
fuel cell power plant products are in the initial stages of development and
market acceptance. As such, costs to manufacture and install our products exceed
current market prices. As of October 31, 2004, we had product sales backlog of
approximately $26.3 million. We do not expect sales from this backlog to be
profitable.
Three
Months Ended January 31, 2005
A
summary of our significant future commitments and contractual obligations as of
January 31, 2005 and the related payments by fiscal year is summarized as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
Payments
Due by Period |
Contractual
Obligation: |
|
Total |
|
Less
than
1
Year |
|
1
- 3
Years |
|
3
- 5
Years |
|
More
than
5
Years |
|
Capital
and Operating lease commitments
(1) |
$ |
4,566 |
|
$ |
1,028 |
|
$ |
1,590 |
|
$ |
1,480 |
|
$ |
468 |
|
Term
loans (principal and interest) |
|
1,505
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
891
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
-- |
|
Purchase
commitments(2) |
|
19,356
|
|
|
19,188
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Series
I Preferred dividends payable
(3) |
|
20,449
|
|
|
378
|
|
|
757
|
|
|
758 |
|
|
18,556 |
|
Series
B Preferred dividends payable
(4) |
|
26,418
|
|
|
5,284
|
|
|
10,567 |
|
|
10,567
|
|
|
-- |
|
Totals |
$ |
72,294 |
|
$ |
26,325 |
|
$ |
13,973 |
|
$ |
12,972 |
|
$ |
19,024 |
|
(1) |
Future
minimum lease payments on capital and operating
leases. |
(2) |
Short-term
purchase commitments with suppliers for materials supplies, and services
incurred in the normal course of business. |
(3) |
Quarterly
dividends of Cdn.$312,500 accrue on the Series 1 preferred shares (subject
to possible reduction pursuant to the terms of the Series 1 preferred
shares on account of increases in the price of our common stock). We have
agreed to pay a minimum of Cdn.$500,000 in cash or common stock annually
to Enbridge, Inc. the holder of the Series 1 preferred shares, so long as
Enbridge holds the shares. Interest accrues on cumulative unpaid dividends
at a 2.45 percent quarterly rate, compounded quarterly, until payment
thereof. Cumulative unpaid dividends and interest at October 31, 2004 were
approximately $2.8 million. For the purposes of this disclosure, we have
assumed that the minimum dividend payments would be made through 2010. In
2010, we would be required to pay any unpaid and accrued dividends. From
2010 through 2020, we would be required to pay annual dividend amounts
totaling Cdn.$1.25 million. |
(4) |
Dividends
on Series B preferred stock accrue at an annual rate of 5% paid quarterly.
The obligations schedule assumes we will pay preferred dividends on these
shares through November 20, 2009, at which time the preferred shares may
be subject to mandatory conversion. We have the option of paying the
dividends in stock or cash. |
On
June 29, 2000, we entered into a loan agreement, secured by machinery and
equipment, and have borrowed an aggregate of $2.2 million under the agreement.
The loan is payable over seven years, with payments of interest only for the
first six months and then repaid in monthly installments over the remaining six
and one-half years with interest computed annually based on the ten-year U.S.
Treasury note plus 2.5 percent. Our current interest rate at January 31, 2005 is
7.2 percent and the outstanding principal balance on this loan is approximately
$1.3 million.
Approximately
$0.6 million of our cash and cash equivalents have been pledged as collateral
for certain banking relationships in which we participate.
Research
and Development Cost-Share Contracts
We
have contracted with various government agencies as either a prime contractor or
sub-contractor on cost-share contracts and agreements. Cost-share terms require
that participating contractors share the total cost of the project in an agreed
ratio with the government agency. For example, our DOE sponsored demonstration
of our two-megawatt DFC 3000 power plant operating on synthesis gas derived from
coal has a total project value of $34.5 million. The DOE will reimburse us 50
percent of the cost on this project and we will incur the balance. Thus, over
the life of this program and assuming that funding is approved annually by
Congress, our share of the total research and development expenditures would be
approximately $17.3 million for this program. As of January 31, 2005, our
research and development sales backlog totaled $24.7 million. As this backlog is
funded in future periods, we will incur additional research and development
cost-share totaling approximately $11.7 million for which we would not be
reimbursed by the government.
Product
Sales Contracts
Our
fuel cell power plant products are in the initial stages of development and
market acceptance. As such, costs to manufacture and install our products exceed
current market prices. As of January 31, 2005, we had product sales backlog of
approximately $22.9 million. We do not expect sales from this backlog to be
profitable.
RECENT
ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In
December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123 (revised 2004) (SFAS No. 123R),
“Share-Based Payment” which revised SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation. This statement supercedes APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees.” The revised statement addresses the accounting for
share-based payment transactions with employees and other third parties,
eliminates the ability to account for share-based compensation transactions
using APB 25 and requires that the compensation costs relating to such
transactions be recognized in the consolidated statement of operations. The
revised statement is effective as of the first interim period beginning after
June 15, 2005. We are currently evaluating the provisions of SFAS No. 123R and
will adopt it on August 1, 2005 as required.
In
November 2004, the FASB ratified the consensus reached by the Emerging Issues
Task Force (EITF), on Issue No. 03-13, “Applying the Conditions in Paragraph 42
of FASB Statement No. 144 in Determining Whether to Report Discontinued
Operations”. The Issue provides a model to assist in evaluating (a) which cash
flows should be considered in the determination of whether cash flows of the
disposal component have been or will be eliminated from the ongoing operations
of the entity and (b) the types of continuing involvement that constitute
significant continuing involvement in the operations of the disposal component.
Should significant continuing ongoing involvement exist, then the disposal
component shall be reported in the results of continuing operations on the
consolidated statements of operations and cash flows. We applied the provisions
of this accounting standard to our financial statements.
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs,” which
amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing,” to
clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight,
handling costs, and wasted material. This Statement requires that those items be
recognized as current-period charges regardless of whether they meet the
criterion of “so abnormal.” In addition, this Statement requires that allocation
of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. We are currently evaluating the
provisions of SFAS No. 151 and will adopt it on November 1, 2005,
as required.
In
December 2003, the FASB issued FIN No. 46R, “Consolidation of Variable
Interest Entities,” which requires an entity to consolidate a variable interest
entity if it is designated as the primary beneficiary of that entity even if the
entity does not have a majority of voting interests. A variable interest entity
is generally defined as an entity where its equity is inadequate to finance its
activities or where the owners of the entity lack the risk and rewards of
ownership. We have evaluated the provisions of FIN No. 46R, as
required, and determined that we did not have any material variable interest
entities and did not have any variable interest entities that require
consolidation into our financial statements.
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Interest
Rate Exposure
Our
exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates, relates primarily to our
investment portfolio and long term debt obligations. Our investment portfolio
includes both short-term United States Treasury instruments with maturities
averaging three months or less, as well as U.S. Treasury notes with fixed
interest rates with maturities of up to twenty months. Cash is invested
overnight with high credit quality financial institutions. Based on our overall
interest exposure at October 31, 2004 and January 31, 2005, including all
interest rate sensitive instruments, a near-term change in interest rate
movements of 1 percent would affect our results of operations by approximately
$0.5 and $1.7 million, respectively, annually.
Foreign
Currency Exchange Risk
We
are subject to foreign exchange risk although we have taken steps to mitigate
those risks where possible. As of October 31, 2004 and January 31, 2005
approximately $2.4 million (or 2 percent) and $1.5 million (or 0.06 percent),
respectively, of our total cash, cash equivalents and investments was in
currencies other than U.S. dollars.
Our
functional currency is the U.S. dollar as is our foreign subsidiary FuelCell
Energy, Ltd. as the majority of our cash is invested in U.S. dollar
investments.
We
recognized a foreign currency gain totaling $0.5 million during the year ended
October 31, 2004, and a foreign currency loss totaling $0.03 million during the
three months ended January 31, 2005. This has been recorded as a component of
interest and other income on our consolidated statement of operations. Although
we have not experienced significant foreign exchange rate losses to date, we may
in the future, especially to the extent that we do not engage in hedging
activities. We do not enter into derivative financial instruments. The economic
impact of currency exchange rate movements on our operating results is complex
because such changes are often linked to variability in real growth, inflation,
interest rates, governmental actions and other factors. These changes, if
material, may cause us to adjust our financing and operating strategies.
Consequently, isolating the effect of changes in currency does not incorporate
these other important economic factors.
BUSINESS
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. is a world leader in the development and manufacture of fuel cell
power plants for clean, efficient and reliable electric power generation.
We have been developing fuel cell technology since our founding in 1969. We are
currently commercializing our core carbonate fuel cell products (Direct
FuelCell®
or DFC®
Power Plants), offering stationary applications for commercial and industrial
customers and continuing to develop our next generation of carbonate fuel cell
products. In addition, we are beginning the development of another high
temperature fuel cell system, planar solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) technology, as
a prime contractor in the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solid State Energy
Conversion Alliance (SECA) Program and through our 42 percent ownership interest
in Versa Power Systems (Versa).
Direct
FuelCell (DFC) Power Plants
Increasing
worldwide demand for reliable power presents significant market opportunities
for our core distributed generation products. Our proprietary carbonate DFC
power plants electrochemically produce electricity directly from readily
available hydrocarbon fuels, such as natural gas and wastewater treatment
gas. We believe our products offer significant advantages compared to
other power generation technologies, including:
· |
Flexible
siting and permitting requirements; |
· |
Ability
to provide electricity and heat for cogeneration applications, such as
district heating, process steam, hot water and absorption chilling for air
conditioning; |
· |
Potentially
lower operating, maintenance and generation costs than alternative
distributed power generation technologies; and
|
· |
Because
our DFC power plants produce hydrogen from readily available fuels such as
natural gas and wastewater treatment gas, they can be used to
cost-effectively cogenerate hydrogen as well as electricity and
heat. |
Our
current products, the DFC300A, DFC1500 and DFC3000, are rated in capacity at 250
kW, 1 MW and 2 MW, respectively, and are scalable for distributed applications
up to 10 MW or larger. Our products are designed to meet the base load
power requirements of a wide range of commercial and industrial customers
including wastewater treatment plants (municipal, such as sewage treatment
facilities, and industrial, such as breweries and food processors),
telecommunications/data centers, manufacturing facilities, office buildings,
hospitals, universities, prisons, mail processing facilities, hotels and
government facilities, as well as in grid support applications for utility
customers. Through February 2005, more than 62 million kWh of electricity
has been generated from power plants incorporating our DFC technology at
customer sites throughout the world.
We
see significant market potential for our DFC products. In October 2004,
Energy User News reported that Allied Business Intelligence (ABI) projected
distributed generation to the grid may increase to 200,000 MW worldwide by 2011
compared with 65,000 MW currently, with 6 percent or 12,000 MW from fuel cells.
A year earlier, ABI reported that global stationary fuel cell cumulative
shipments would rise from 55 MW cumulative through 2003 to nearly 18,000 MW
cumulative through 2013,
according to its moderate forecast. Another study, prepared by the
DOE/Energy Information Administration (EIA) in 2000, estimated the potential
market for combined heat and power (CHP) plant installations in the United
States to be greater than 77,000 MW. This includes 6,500 MW for
hotels/motels, 8,000 MW for hospitals, 19,000 MW for
schools/colleges/universities, and over 18,600 MW for office
buildings.
We
have invested more than $450 million in the development of our fuel cell
technology, including funding from various U.S. government agencies such as the
DOE and the Environmental Protection Agency. Our primary focus is carbonate fuel
cell technology, which we have advanced from the laboratory into standard DFC
products. We believe we have established a leading position for our DFC products
in the commercial distributed generation marketplace due to a number of factors,
including:
· |
We
are selling ‘ultra-clean’ high-temperature fuel cell power plants for
stationary base load power, which provide high fuel efficiency and
high-value waste heat for cogeneration
applications. |
· |
We
have strong global distribution partners, including original equipment
manufactures (OEMs) and energy service companies (ESCOs), with expertise
in selling and marketing energy products and services to commercial and
industrial customers worldwide. |
· |
We
obtained commercial product certifications for safety, interconnection,
installation and performance. |
· |
We
are operating a fleet of DFC power plants at customer sites throughout the
world, with a backlog that we expect will double the fleet in service in
the next 12-18 months. |
· |
We
have established production facilities, with equipment in place to produce
50 MW of DFC products annually. |
· |
We
achieved our 2004 value-engineering cost reduction target of 25 percent
and are confident we can continue to reduce
costs. |
· |
We
have expanded our sales and service capabilities to support our DFC
products. |
· |
We
have a strong balance sheet, with over $230 million in cash, cash
equivalents and investments (U.S. Treasury Securities) as of January 31,
2005 to support our growth. |
We
believe there are positive trends within the distributed generation and fuel
cell markets that will benefit our DFC power plant business. Increasing
worldwide demand for reliable power, concerns over air pollution caused by
combustion power generation, and unreliable electrical grid delivery systems
present significant market opportunities for our core DFC products. Furthermore,
because of their non-combustion, non-mechanical power generation process, fuel
cells are more efficient, produce significantly less pollutant emissions, are
better suited to provide combined heat and power (CHP) and offer more quiet and
flexible siting distributed generation solutions than comparable conventional
power plants.
In
introducing our products to the marketplace, we face obstacles that can lengthen
the sales cycle. At the macro-economic level, these include varying energy
demand, capital appropriation cycles and changing economic environments such as
rising fuel prices. For example, in the short term, the sales effort for
DFC projects and other distributed generation projects operating on natural gas
were adversely affected in 2004 by higher fuel prices. Grid-delivered
electricity prices can have a regulatory lag of up to one year or more before
fuel costs are reflected in local utility rates. Over the longer term, our
higher fuel efficiency should result in customer preference for base load power
generation using our DFC products.
Other
market obstacles vary by region, but include regulatory uncertainty for
distributed generation, monopoly-based electricity markets, interconnect issues,
disparate recognition of the locational value and environmental benefits of
distributed generation, standby power costs and stranded asset exit fees.
We believe that the marketplace is responding to these issues.
In
the U.S., which is among the most difficult regulatory environments,
interconnect standards, standby charges and exit fees are being adjusted to
accommodate newer technologies that generate electricity with greater fuel
efficiency and reduced emissions. New York and Massachusetts adopted
exemptions from these charges for our DFC products in 2004, following
California’s lead in 2003. We expect that this trend will continue and help to
accelerate the market penetration of our DFC power plants.
To
further stimulate the market, significant incentive programs are available in
Asia, the U.S. and Europe, with many being renewed and new ones being
introduced. For example, new energy policies in Japan and Korea were announced
to meet clean energy requirements in those countries, and new initiatives in
Connecticut and New York are requesting large scale renewable projects of 10 MW
or larger. California renewed its Self Generation Incentive Program in 2004,
with funding approved for clean distributed generation projects through 2007.
European incentive programs are similar and our partner, MTU CFC Solutions, Gmbh
(MTU), a DaimlerChrysler subsidiary, has technology, manufacturing and
distribution rights for carbonate fuel cell power plants and is focused on the
European market.
High
product cost due to the early stage of commercializing our DFC power plants
results in our product pricing being substantially higher than competing
products that are more mature. Available government subsidies make us more
competitive with other sources of delivered electrical energy, but the approval
and funding process for these government incentive programs can be protracted.
We are beginning to see evidence that timing for this process is shortening,
e.g., in California, where we are participating with government agencies in an
increasing number of projects.
Our
products produce electricity and thermal energy which are commodities to end
users. While our products compete essentially on price, the attributes of our
DFC products enhance our value proposition. For example, in some global regions
with strict air emissions controls, the ‘ultra-clean’ designation of our DFC
power plants enables our products to be sited where combustion-based
technologies cannot. We believe our DFC products can provide more favorable
attributes such as improved reliability, quiet operation, scalability, ability
to provide electricity and heat for cogeneration applications, such as district
heating, process steam, hot water and absorption chilling for air conditioning,
and ultra low emissions at less cost with volume production. We are currently
selling our products to customers in high cost electricity markets at prices
that, when combined with government incentives, are economically competitive
with other power sources. We believe that our progress in 2004 enhances our
opportunity to increase sales and continue to reduce costs to market clearing
prices for our DFC products. In the higher cost regions of the U.S., i.e.,
California and the Northeast, we believe that market clearing prices are between
$2,000 and $3,000 per kW. In regions where electricity prices are even higher,
i.e., Asia and Europe, and for mission critical applications that demand higher
reliability, we believe market clearing prices can be higher. The cost of
our
standard sub-MW product design at the end of 2004 was reduced from over $8,000
per kW to approximately $6,000 per kW, which is a 25 percent reduction in cost.
Our MW-class products have an inherent 20 to 25 percent cost advantage over the
sub-MW product due to economies of scale primarily in the balance of plant.
With
our currently achieved and projected annual cost reduction targets, we believe
we can reach gross margin break-even on product sales at a sustained annual
order and production volume of approximately 35 MW to 50 MW, depending on
product mix, geographic location and other variables such as fuel prices. We
believe that Company net income break-even can be achieved at a sustained annual
order and volume production of approximately 100 MW. Our fiscal 2004 production
volume was approximately 6 MW.
Our
strategy for 2005 is to continue our cost reduction program and focus our
selling efforts on markets that have the potential for repeatable volume. These
markets have some combination of high electrical costs, strict emissions
controls, grid constraints and other characteristics that require a clean,
efficient distributed generation solution. In addition, we are focusing on
market segments that offer sufficient funding availability to make our current
product pricing competitive with the local cost of electricity and cogeneration.
We see these markets as a bridge to support our order activity while we are
operating at higher cost and lower volume. We will concentrate our market
efforts on Japan/Asia, California and the Northeast United States where such
programs are most prevalent, while MTU will focus on Europe. As the results of
our product cost reduction efforts enable us to lower prices, we expect we will
move from these bridge markets to broad market acceptance.
DIRECT
FUEL CELL® (DFC®) TECHNOLOGY
Direct
FuelCell power plants represent an environmentally friendly alternative power
generation source when compared to traditional combustion technologies, such as
gas turbines or internal combustion engines. These fuel cell power plants can
potentially yield a lower cost of electricity. Less restrictive permitting
requirements, due to the favorable DFC emissions profiles, can reduce
installation costs. Greater fuel efficiency, minimal moving parts and remote
monitoring can provide lower ongoing fuel and maintenance costs.
A
fuel cell converts a hydrocarbon fuel, such as natural gas or wastewater
treatment gas, into electricity without the combustion of the fuel. The primary
byproducts of the fuel cell are heat, water, reduced emissions of carbon dioxide
and virtually no sulfur dioxide (SOX) or nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions. A fuel
cell power plant can be thought of as having two basic segments: the fuel cell
stack module, the part that actually produces the electricity, and the balance
of plant (BOP), which includes various fuel handling and processing equipment,
such as pipes, blowers, and electrical interface equipment such as inverters to
convert the direct current (DC) output of the fuel cell to alternating current
(AC).
Conventional
non-nuclear power plants generate electricity by combustion of hydrocarbon
fuels, such as coal, oil or natural gas. In the case of reciprocating
engines, combustion of the fuel takes place within the engine that drives a
generator. In a gas turbine combined cycle plant, fuels, such as natural
gas, are burned in the gas turbine to generate electricity. The exhaust heat
from the gas turbine is used to boil water, converting it to high-pressure
steam, which is used to rotate a steam turbine generating additional
electricity. Each step in these processes consumes some of the potential energy
in the fuel, and the combustion process typically creates emissions of SOX and
NOX, carbon monoxide, soot and other air pollutants.
The
following table shows our estimates of the electrical efficiency, operating
temperature, expected capacity range and certain other operating characteristics
of the principal types of fuel cells being developed for commercial
applications:
Fuel
Cell Type |
|
Electrolyte |
|
Electrical
Efficiency
% |
|
Operating
Temperature
oF |
|
Expected
Capacity
Range |
|
By-Product
Heat Use |
PEM |
|
Polymer
Membrane |
|
30-35 |
|
180 |
|
5kW
to
250
kW |
|
Warm
Water |
Phosphoric
Acid |
|
Phosphoric
Acid |
|
35-40 |
|
400 |
|
50kW
to
200
kW |
|
Hot
Water |
Carbonate
(Direct
FuelCell®) |
|
Potassium/Lithium
Carbonate |
|
45-57 |
|
1200 |
|
250
kW to
3
MW |
|
High
Pressure
Steam |
Solid
Oxide (Tubular) |
|
Stabilized
Zirconium dioxide Ceramic |
|
45-50 |
|
1800 |
|
100
kW to
3
MW |
|
High
Pressure
Steam |
Solid
Oxide (Planar) |
|
Stabilized
Zirconium dioxide Ceramic |
|
40-60 |
|
1200-1600 |
|
3
kW to 10 kW |
|
High
Pressure Steam |
Our
carbonate fuel cell, known as the Direct FuelCell, operates at approximately
1200°F. This temperature avoids the use of precious metal electrodes required by
lower temperature fuel cells, such as proton exchange membrane (PEM) and
phosphoric acid, and the more expensive metals and ceramic materials required by
higher temperature fuel cells, such as solid oxide (tubular). As a result, we
are able to use less expensive catalysts and readily available metals in our
designs. In addition, our fuel cell produces high quality by-product heat
energy (700°F) that can be harnessed for CHP applications using hot water, steam
or chiller water to heat or cool buildings.
Our
Direct FuelCell has been demonstrated using a variety of hydrocarbon fuels,
including natural gas, methanol, diesel, biogas, coal gas, coal mine methane and
propane. Our commercial DFC power plants currently can achieve an
electrical efficiency of between 45 percent and 47 percent, and are expected to
achieve an electrical efficiency of up to 57 percent at product maturity.
Depending on location, application and load size, we expect that a co-generation
configuration will reach an overall energy efficiency of between 70 percent and
80 percent. The following diagram shows the difference between a typical
low temperature, external reforming fuel cell and our Direct FuelCell in the
conversion of fuel into electricity.
LOW
TEMPERATURE EXTERNAL
REFORMING
FUEL CELL
(Other
Companies’ Technology) |
HIGH
TEMPERATURE INTERNAL
REFORMING
DIRECT FUELCELL
(FuelCell
Energy Technology)
|
|
|
Our
Direct FuelCell is so named because of its ability to generate electricity
directly from a hydrocarbon fuel, such as natural gas or wastewater treatment
gas, by reforming the fuel inside the fuel cell to produce hydrogen. We believe
that this "one-step" process results in a simpler, more efficient and
cost-effective energy conversion system compared with external reforming fuel
cells. External reforming fuel cells, such as PEM and phosphoric acid, generally
use complex, external fuel processing equipment to convert the fuel into
hydrogen. This external equipment increases capital cost and reduces electrical
efficiency.
Our
initial market entry commercial products are rated at 250 kW, 1 MW and 2 MW in
capacity. Our products are targeted for utility, commercial and industrial
customers in the growing distributed generation market for applications up to 10
MW or larger. We are also developing additional DFC products based on our core
carbonate technology including:
· |
Direct
FuelCell/Turbine® (DFC/T®) - a combined-cycle system that produces
additional electricity from by-product heat energy using an unfired gas
turbine with electrical efficiency expected to approach 70 percent in
large applications; and |
· |
Ship
Service Fuel Cell (SSFC) - a DFC power plant that operates on
marine-diesel fuel with applications such as hotel power (non-propulsion)
for naval vessels and cruise ships, as well as power generation for
islands. |
Value
Proposition
Our
products produce electricity and thermal energy which are commodities to end
users. While our products compete essentially on price, the attributes of our
DFC products enhance our value proposition. For example, in some global regions
with strict air emissions controls, the ‘ultra-clean’ designation of our DFC
power plants enables our products to be sited where combustion-based
technologies cannot. We believe our DFC products can provide more favorable
attributes, such as improved reliability, quiet operation, scalability, ability
to provide electricity and heat for cogeneration applications, such as district
heating, process steam, hot water and absorption chilling for air conditioning,
and ultra low emissions at less cost with volume production. We are currently
selling our products to customers in high cost electricity markets at prices
that, when combined with government incentives, are economically competitive
with other power generating sources. Over time, as our cost-out program enables
us to reduce our prices, we believe we will be less reliant on and eventually
eliminate the need for government subsidies to price our products at market
clearing prices. A specific example of how the economics would work currently is
set forth below.
Based
on a $7.00/MMBtu gas price, the raw life cycle cost of electricity to the end
user at the prices we are quoting today (absent any subsidies), is between $0.15
and $0.20/kWh. With an incentive of $2,500/kW, the cost of electricity to the
end user is in the low-teens per kWh, a competitive price in many high cost
energy regions of the world. Factoring in the value of the heat used for
cogeneration ($0.01-$0.02/kWh), the added value of increased reliability ($0.005
to $0.015/kWh), and the offset due to emissions credits (up to $0.01/kWh if
regionally available), the net cost to the end user could be $0.10/kWh or less,
depending on location. In many areas of the world, this competes with
grid-delivered electricity.
The
recent rise in the cost of natural gas during the past year has made our
products as well as other conventional distributed generation technologies less
competitive with the grid (grid-delivered electricity prices are not immediately
affected by spot changes in energy prices such as natural gas, coal and oil due
to previously secured long-term supply contracts and a regulatory system that
takes 6 months to a year or more to approve rate increases when requested by
local utilities). Specifically, the average delivered price of natural gas sold
to commercial consumers in the California and Northeastern U.S. markets of
$6.00/MMBtu to $6.50/MMBtu for commercial customers increased to as high as
$9.00/MMBtu in mid-2004. We estimate that each $1.00/MMBtu change in natural gas
prices increases the cost of electricity of our DFC products by $0.0083/kWh.
Natural gas prices have subsided from their recent peak, but variability has
increased ($2.00/MMBtu depending on demand and weather). Over time, energy
prices tend to revert to the oil price per barrel equivalent, so we view the
disparate fuel and electricity prices as a short-term phenomenon that will be
resolved over time.
DISTRIBUTED
GENERATION MARKETS
The
demand for reliable power, increasing concerns about the emission of harmful
greenhouse gases and particulate matter, and the inability of central power
generation systems to cogenerate heat and electricity, have created demand for
new technologies that can provide clean, economic on-site generation.
Consequently, projected demand for distributed generation is growing throughout
the world. In October 2004, Energy User News reported that ABI projected
distributed generation to the grid may increase to 200,000 MW worldwide by 2011
compared with 65,000 MW currently, with 6 percent or 12,000 MW from fuel cells.
A year earlier, ABI reported that global stationary fuel cell cumulative
shipments would rise from 55 MW cumulative through 2003 to nearly 18,000 MW
cumulative through 2013,
according to its moderate forecast.
We
believe distributed generation using our Direct FuelCell power plants are an
alternative power generation solution because they:
. |
Increase
reliability by locating power closer to the end
user.
On-site power generation bypasses the congested transmission and
distribution system, increasing electrical reliability to the end
user. |
. |
Provide
better economics.
The economic justification for distributed generation is a result of a
number of factors, such as avoidance of transmission and distribution
system investment, reduction of line losses, and utilization of the heat
by-product from on-site power generation. |
. |
Ease
congestion in the transmission and distribution
system.
Each kilowatt of on-site power generation removes the same amount from the
transmission and distribution system, thereby easing congestion that can
cause power outages and hastening the grid recovery after electrical
infrastructure problems have been resolved. |
. |
Provide
greater capacity utilization in less time.
Distributed generation can be added in increments that more closely match
expected demand in a shorter time frame (weeks to months) compared with
traditional central power generating plants and transmission and
distribution systems (often 12 to 36 months or longer) which require more
extensive siting and right of way
approvals. |
. |
Enhance
security.
By locating smaller, incremental power plants in dispersed locations
closer to energy consumers, distributed generation can reduce dependence
on a vulnerable centralized electrical
infrastructure. |
Our
DFC power plants provide the following attributes:
. |
Offer
higher operational efficiency.
Our DFC power plants currently achieve electrical efficiencies of 45 to 47
percent and have the potential to reach an electrical efficiency 57
percent at product maturity in single-cycle applications. In addition, our
DFC power plants can achieve overall energy efficiency of 70 to 80 percent
for combined heat and power applications. This is greater than the fuel
efficiency of competing fuel cell and combustion-based technologies of
similar size and potentially results in a lower cost per kWh over the life
of the power plant. |
. |
Lower
emissions.
Our DFC power plants have significantly lower emissions of greenhouse
gases and particulate matter than conventional combustion-based power
plants. They emit virtually no NOX or SOX and have been designated
"ultra-clean" by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Comparative emissions of fuel cell power plants versus traditional
combustion-based power plants as compiled by the DOE/National Energy
Technology Laboratory and company product specification sheets are as
follows: |
|
|
Emissions
(Lbs. Per MWh) |
|
|
|
Nox |
|
SO2 |
|
Average
U.S. Fossil Fuel Plant |
|
|
4.200 |
|
|
9.210 |
|
Microturbine
(60-kW) |
|
|
0.490 |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Small
Gas Turbine (250-kW) |
|
|
0.467 |
|
|
0.000 |
|
Combined
Cycle Gas Turbine |
|
|
0.230 |
|
|
0.005 |
|
Fuel
Cell, Single Cycle (DFC) |
|
|
0.016 |
|
|
0.000 |
|
. |
Utilize
multiple fuels.
Our DFC power plants can utilize many fuel sources, such as natural gas,
industrial and municipal wastewater treatment gas, propane, and coal gas
(escaping gas from active and abandoned coal mines as well as synthesis
gas processed from coal), thereby enhancing energy independence from
imported oil. |
Many
governments at various levels, both in the U.S. and abroad, are proactively
pursuing incentive programs to stimulate the development of distributed
generation in general and fuel cells in particular. New programs have emerged in
Connecticut, New York, Japan, Korea and Canada, and an existing program was
renewed and extended in California. We believe we can capitalize on the
substantial global incentives available for distributed generation, alternative
energy and renewable technologies, which include subsidies ranging up to 55
percent of project costs depending on the application and the site. We and
our partners have been able to take advantage of specific incentives in the
U.S., Japan and Germany.
In
the near-term, we believe these government-sponsored incentive programs will
facilitate DFC product sales. In the longer term, we believe that our
product cost reduction program and higher production volumes will lessen or
eliminate the need for incentives.
We
continue to target our initial commercialization efforts for the following
stationary power applications:
· |
Customers
in regions with high electricity prices. |
· |
Customers
with 24/7 base load power requirements. |
· |
Customers
with electric grid distribution or transmission shortages or
congestion. |
· |
Commercial
and industrial customers who can use the high-quality heat by-product for
cogeneration applications. |
· |
Customers
with opportunity fuels such as anaerobic digester gas from municipal and
industrial wastewater treatment facilities. |
· |
Customers
in regions with strict air pollution
requirements. |
These
customer characteristics are prevalent in selected regions in the United States,
such as California and the northeastern states, and internationally in Canada,
Europe, Japan and Korea. These are areas where government incentives and
other approved legislation support distributed generation in general and fuel
cells in particular. We are focusing on market segments that offer
sufficient incentive funding available to make our current product pricing
competitive with the local cost of electricity and cogeneration. We see
these markets as a bridge to support order activity while we are operating at
higher cost and lower volume. As the results of our product cost out
efforts enable us to lower our prices, we expect we will move from these bridge
markets to broad commercial acceptance.
Because
our DFC products can operate on wastewater treatment gas, a biomass renewable
fuel, we can provide one of the few sources of base load distributed generation
within the renewable portfolio standards (RPS) many states and countries are
beginning to implement. In some jurisdictions, our DFC power plants, due to
their favorable ultra-low emissions and 'ultra-clean' status, can qualify for
RPS programs when operating on natural gas. This classifies our fuel cell
products similar to wind and solar projects that are eligible for funding under
these programs.
Geographical
Markets
We
are pursuing a strategy of global geographic penetration through our strong
strategic partners, which has enabled us to introduce our products in early
adopter markets throughout the world. In selected regions, local market
conditions, incentives and regulations have evolved which have enabled customers
to purchase our products. These early adopters recognize the environmental
and economic value of our DFC power plants.
Japan
Japan's
electricity prices are among the highest in the world. In addition, the
government has strict emissions goals, following the Kyoto Protocol, which have
resulted in the need to reduce emissions from the power-generating sector.
Employing CHP technology is an important means to reduce carbon dioxide
emissions, however, Japanese air pollution protection laws restrict installing
and operating traditional generating technologies in urban areas. Since
the Japanese Ministry of Environmental Protection has approved our DFC power
plants as meeting or exceeding all Japanese air pollution control laws, we
believe demand for our DFC products will increase. We have seen the most
progress with our DFC products in this market, with Marubeni ordering 1.25 MW in
2001 followed by repeat orders of 3 MW and 4 MW in 2003 and 2004, respectively.
There
are a number of other market drivers beyond strict emissions requirements that
we believe will stimulate demand for our DFC power plants in Japan. First,
a new regulation requires the use of wastewater treatment facilities for
agriculture and farming. The Japanese government is subsidizing these new
wastewater treatment facilities, including any power generation equipment that
makes efficient use of “opportunity fuels” that result from wastewater
treatment. Second, a national RPS for the power generation sector was adopted.
The initial targets are approximately 3,500 MW by 2010. Our DFC products
operating on anaerobic digester gas qualify under this standard. Third, a number
of government-backed subsidy programs are available to DFC products, with
incentives ranging from 35 percent to 55 percent. The aggregate annual budget by
the various Japanese ministries for these programs total $50 million. Fourth,
the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry announced a new energy
program with the goal of 2,200 MW of fuel cell power by 2010. Our Japanese
partner, Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni), has been successful in working with
various Japanese ministries to obtain approvals for broad siting flexibility to
meet the growing demand for our DFC products.
Korea
With
the addition of POSCO as a sub-distributor and eventual packager of our DFC
products for Marubeni, we have broadened our Asian marketing presence to include
Korea. In 2004, fuel cells were identified as one of the 10 economic growth
engines for the Korean economy and POSCO was assigned by the Korean government
to develop and commercialize large stationary fuel cell power plants. POSCO
selected our DFC products through Marubeni to pursue this effort, which we
believe further confirms our leadership position in large stationary fuel cell
power plants for the commercial and industrial customers. The Korean
government’s goal is to install 300 stationary fuel cell power plants, sized
250-kW to 1 MW, by 2012, and has designated $1.6 billion to support this effort.
North
America - U.S.
The
U.S. is characterized by high electricity costs and grid-constraints in selected
regions, such as California and the northeastern states such as New Jersey, New
York, Connecticut and Massachusetts. We have found that the utility monopoly
status is more entrenched in the U.S. than in other global markets, but we are
seeing developments that favor clean and efficient distributed generation such
as our DFC power plants. Existing programs are being renewed, and new
initiatives are being implemented.
California
has become a leader in regulatory policy. For example, our DFC power
plants have been certified to meet interconnection standards of investor owned
electric utilities. In addition, our DFC power plants meet the strict
emissions requirement of the California Air Resources Board standard for 2007,
and have been designated as an 'ultra-clean' distributed generation technology.
As a result, customers have access to certain incentive funding for the purchase
of our DFC power plants. In addition, customers who install and operate
our DFC power plants are exempt from exit fees and stand-by charges, saving them
from paying fees of approximately $.025-$0.03/kWh. End-users of fuel cell
power plants are eligible to sell back unused power to publicly owned utilities
during off-peak hours at wholesale or generation-based rates of approximately
$0.04-$0.05/kWh. The California Self Generation Program provides $100
million per year of incentive funding for 'ultra-clean' technologies on the
basis of $2,500/kW for our DFC products operating on natural gas and $4,500/kW
for our DFC products operating on renewable fuels such as anaerobic gas from
wastewater treatment facilities.
We
were able to demonstrate the competitiveness of our DFC products through this
program during the past 12 months. In fiscal year 2004, Alliance Power secured
two customers through this program (City of Santa Barbara, 500 kW, and Sierra
Nevada Brewing Co., 1MW). Chevron Energy Solutions secured our first DFC1500
project in the State with the Santa Rita Correctional Facility in Alameda
County, and, early in fiscal 2005, secured a 250-kW project for the San
Francisco Mail Processing Facility. This program has been extended through 2007,
enabling over 20 MW of project funding per year.
In
Connecticut, legislation was recently passed that will require the state’s
utility distribution companies to have 100 MW of generation from renewable
technologies contracted by mid-2007. The request for proposals for the first
round (30 MW) was issued and project submissions (between 1 MW and 15 MW) are
due March 17, 2005. Final projects are expected to be selected by September 30,
2005. The Round 2 (30 MW) and the Round 3 (40 MW) selection process are expected
to follow in succession. Our DFC power plants operating on natural gas are a
Class I renewable technology and meet the eligibility requirements for this
program.
Other
states are also implementing policies to accelerate the installation of clean
distributed generation technologies. For example, New York State exempts
our DFC power plants from stand-by charges if the installation represents less
than 15 percent of the customer's maximum potential demand. In addition, the New
York Public Service Commission adopted a renewable energy policy to increase
electricity from renewable sources to 25 percent by 2013. To meet this
requirement, it is estimated that New York State will need up to 3,700 MW of
generation from renewable technology. Our DFC power plants operating on natural
gas meet the renewable eligibility requirements in New York State.
These
renewable energy initiatives in Connecticut and New York may provide us with
opportunities for large scale multi-MW projects sized to 10-15 MW or
larger.
At
the U.S. federal level, in addition to significant research and development
funds that we receive from the U.S. federal government, the U.S. Department of
Defense Climate Change Fuel Cell Program grants funds to fuel cell power plant
buyers, providing up to $1,000 per kW of plant capacity (not to exceed one-third
of total program costs). In fiscal year 2005, there is approximately $1.2
million available for buyers of these fuel cell system incentive grants. While
the Energy Policy Act of 2003 was not passed by Congress, it contained important
incentives, including: (1) an investment tax credit of 30 percent or $1,000 per
kW, whichever is less, for fuel cell power plant installations; and, (2) an
advanced power system technology incentive program which provided for a 1.8 to
2.5 cents per kWh subsidy to owner-operators of qualifying facilities, including
fuel cells, turbines and hybrid power systems. As a result of the November 2004
election, we expect an energy bill will be initiated in fiscal year 2005. We
expect to benefit should similar provisions be included in a renewed energy
bill.
North
America - Canada
Our
distribution partner, Enbridge, Inc., is currently developing provincial
relationships in Canada to have our DFC products included in a portfolio
approach to replace more than 100 MW of coal and nuclear power plants and other
projects with funding through the country’s Cdn$250 million Sustainable
Development Technology Program Enbridge, Inc., is the owner and operator of
Canada’s largest natural gas distribution company, Enbridge Gas Distribution,
which provides natural gas to industrial, commercial and residential customers
in Ontario, Quebec and New York State.
Europe
While,
electricity prices in Europe are not as high as they are in Japan and in the
more expensive regions of the U.S., emphasis remains on reducing carbon dioxide
emissions and grid-connected CHP projects are encouraged. The CHP Law, enacted
in 2002, provides a €0.0511/kWh
subsidy payable for 10 years for grid-connected CHP power plants, up to 2 MW. We
estimate that this is the equivalent of a $1,000 to $2,000 per kW capital cost
subsidy. In 2004, Germany’s Renewable Energy Law opened up eligibility for fuel
cells to receive up to €0.20/kWh,
including a €0.02/kWh premium over combustion-based technologies. RWE,
Europe’s largest investor owned utility, has invested in and has partnered with
our German partner, MTU CFC Solutions GmbH, a DaimlerChrysler subsidiary. In a
June 2003 report commissioned by World Wildlife Fund For Nature in co-operation
with Fuel Cell Europe, it was reported that RWE expects 1,000 to 5,000 MW of
German electricity demand to be supplied by distributed power by
2015.
In
the broader European market, the European Union has earmarked €100
million for research and demonstration projects for hydrogen and fuel cells
through 2006.
Target
Applications
Our
products are designed to meet the base load power requirements of a wide range
of commercial and industrial customers including wastewater treatment plants,
data centers, manufacturing and industrial facilities, office buildings,
hospitals, mission critical applications, universities and hotels, as well as in
grid support applications for utility customers. Some specific markets we
are targeting have substantial market potential as set forth in the table
below.
Source:
DOE/Onsite Sycom Energy Corp., “The Market and Technical Potential for Combined
Heat and Power in the Commercial/Industrial Sector,” January 2000 (Revision
1)
Some
specific applications of these representative applications include:
· |
Wastewater
treatment plants.
This application provides a unique opportunity because the methane
generated from the anaerobic gas digestion process is used as fuel for the
DFC power plant, which in turn generates the electricity to operate the
wastewater treatment equipment at the facility. Wastewater treatment
gas is considered a renewable fuel eligible for many government incentive
funding for project installations throughout the
world. |
o |
Industrial.
We delivered our first commercially available DFC300A power plant to the
Kirin Brewery in Japan in January 2003. In 2005, we expect to install 1-MW
of DFC power (4 DFC300A power plants) for a beer brewery at the Sierra
Nevada Brewing Co. in Chico, Calif. through our North American
distribution partner, Alliance Power, and a 250-kW DFC300A power plant for
a food recycling facility for Bioenergy Co. at Tokyo ‘Super Eco Town’ in
Japan through our Asian distribution partner, Marubeni
Corp. |
o |
Municipal.
We began operating our first MW-class DFC1500 at the King County
Wastewater Facility in Washington State on natural gas in 2004 that has
now switched over to operation on anaerobic digester gas. We have
installed 250-kW DFC300A power plants to the following municipal
wastewater treatment facilities - the City of Fukuoka (through Marubeni
Corp.), Terminal Island for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
(direct sale), Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (through
Caterpillar), and the City of Santa Barbara (two units through Alliance
Power). |
· |
Hotels.
Our DFC 300A power plants at the 300-room Sheraton Edison and Sheraton
Parsippany hotels in New Jersey provide each hotel with their 250 kW base
load electricity requirements and 25 percent of their hot water needs. Our
recently installed DFC300A power plant at the 1,750-room Sheraton New York
Hotel and Towers in Manhattan will provide approximately 10 percent of the
electricity and hot water requirements. |
· |
Institutional
- Universities.
At the Environmental Science Center near Yale University’s Peabody Museum
in New Haven, Connecticut, our DFC 300A power plant provides approximately
25 percent of the building’s electricity needs, with the heat byproduct
being used primarily to maintain tight temperature and humidity controls
for its artifact storage facility. At the Michigan Alternative and
Renewable Energy Center at Grand Valley State University in Muskegon,
Mich., our DFC300A power plant is part of a comprehensive grid-independent
energy system (includes solar panels and batteries for load following
power requirements) that provides substantially all of the facility’s base
load electricity and uses the heat byproduct for heating and cooling. At
Ocean County College in New Jersey, our DFC300A power plant provides 90
percent of the daily power requirements for three of the campus’ buildings
and 20 percent of the heating needs for six buildings. One of the three
DFC300A power plants purchased by Marubeni’s Korean sub-distributor,
POSCO, is expected to be installed at the Pohang University Science and
Technology Center in Pohang City, Korea. |
· |
Institutional
- Hospitals.
MTU has provided its sub-MW carbonate fuel cell power plant, which
incorporates our DFC components, for a number of hospitals and clinics in
Germany that supply electricity to the local clinic grid and the hot
exhaust air is used to produce process steam for the facilities.
Installations include the Rhon Klinikum Bad Neustadt (which completed its
field trial in August 2004 after operating for more than 21,000 hours),
Rhon Klinikum Bad Berka, Magdeburg Clinic and the Gruenstadt
Clinic/Pfalzwerke. |
· |
Industrial.
MTU has installed its sub-MW carbonate fuel cell power plant for
industrial CHP applications in Europe, such as a Michelin tire factory in
Germany and a IZAR ship building factory in Spain. Marubeni has installed
two DFC power plants for an Epson factory in Japan and a natural gas
gathering station at Japex, also in Japan. Caterpillar has installed and
operated a DFC300A power plant at its technology center in Peoria,
Illinois. |
· |
Institutional
-
Telecommunications/Data Centers. MTU
has installed a sub-MW carbonate fuel cell power plant for Deutsche
Telecom in Munich, Germany that provides DC backup power for a
telecommunications center. |
· |
Institutional
- Prisons. We
announced our first one-MW DFC1500 power plant sale in California to
Alameda County for the Santa Rita Correctional Facility in Dublin, Calif.
This also was the first fuel cell project with our North American
distribution partner, Chevron Energy Solutions, and delivery is expected
in calendar year 2005. |
· |
Grid
Support.
The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power has been a long-standing
customer of ours, and operated one of our first field trial units. They
have installed two separate DFC300 power plants that provide electricity
to the grid - one at their corporate headquarters and one at another
downtown location. In 2004, we delivered a DFC300A power plant to a
Westerville, Ohio substation facility for American Municipal Power-Ohio
for its municipal distribution system. In 2005, we expect to deliver a
DFC300A power plant for the Salt River project. This unit will be located
at the Arizona State University East Campus in Mesa, Ariz. and provide
electricity to the local grid. |
· |
Federal.
We are targeting the U.S. Government as an end-use customer for our DFC
products. Since the blackout of August 2003, we have seen a growing
interest by the government in increasing the reliability of power for
mission critical applications. There is a DFC300A power plant installed at
the Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod in Bourne, Mass. that was sold
through our North American distribution partner, PPL Energy Plus. Our
North American distribution partner, Chevron Energy Solutions, sold a
250-kW DFC300A power plant to the U.S. Postal Service’s San Francisco
Processing and Distribution Center that is expected to be delivered in
calendar year 2005. The market for combined heat and power applications
for federal facilities is estimated to be 1,590
MW. |
We
have installed a DFC300A power plant at the Fuel Cell Test and Evaluation Center
in Johnstown, Penn., for a combined heat and power demonstration. The goals of
this demonstration are to (1) analyze the use of available system heat output
for trigeneration - the supply of electricity as well as chilled and hot water
in a combined system - and (2) analyze the simultaneous operation on natural gas
and propane for dual-fueled capability. This is part of a $7 million fiscal 2005
budget appropriation by the U.S. Government for carbonate fuel cells, which also
includes funding for two other MW-class systems.
Strategic
Alliances/Market Development Agreements
Our
sales and marketing strategy is to work predominantly with established OEMs and
ESCOs who have significant expertise in selling equipment and/or comprehensive
services to energy users. These relationships strengthen our ability
to bring our stationary fuel cell power plants to key target markets and
applications and provide valuable input for our cost reduction and product
improvement efforts. In certain circumstances, we sell our products directly to
end-users.
Our
OEM partners have extensive experience in designing, manufacturing, distributing
and servicing energy products worldwide. We believe our strength in the
development of fuel cell products coupled with their understanding of
sophisticated commercial and industrial customers, products and services will
enhance the sales, service and product development of our high temperature
stationary fuel cell power plants.
Our
energy service company partners have extensive experience in selling
comprehensive energy services to commercial and industrial customers that
include demand side management, product selection and commodity procurement.
They have added our DFC power plants to their offering of power generation
products and services as a cost effective energy solution to their
customers.
Through
our field trial program, we have directly partnered with certain customers who
have hosted our product demonstrations. These customer partners have the option
to negotiate arrangements for the sale, distribution and service of FuelCell's
DFC power plants upon completion of the project.
Original
Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) Partners
MTU
CFC Solutions GmbH, a subsidiary of DaimlerChrysler.
MTU, headquartered in Munich, Germany, has been an investor in our company and
co-developer of our DFC technology since 1989. The sub-MW power plant is a
collaborative effort utilizing our DFC technology and the Hot Module®
BOP design of MTU. In July 2003, RWE Fuel Cells GmbH, a subsidiary of RWE
AG, Germany’s largest electric utility, established a joint venture with MTU and
RWE Fuel Cells GmbH holds a 25.1 percent stake in MTU CFC Solutions,
GmbH.
MTU
currently has sub-MW fuel cell power plant installations at eight locations in
Europe (in Germany unless otherwise noted), including an energy park at RWE; a
telecommunications center for Deutsche Telecom; a tire manufacturing facility
for Michelin; at a Berlin-based utility, Vattenburg/BeWag (first European
dual-fueled carbonate fuel cell power plant); at Bad Berka Hospital; at
Magdeburg Clinic; at Gruendstat Clinic; and at IZAR, a shipbuilder, in Spain.
MTU has announced that it will install two additional units in 2005, including
the first European digester gas carbonate power plant in Ahlen,
Germany.
We
have two agreements with MTU, a Cell License Agreement and a Balance of Plant
License Agreement. Under our current Cell License Agreement, which has
been extended through December 2009, we license our DFC technology to MTU for
use exclusively in Europe and the Middle East and non-exclusively in Africa and
South America. We also sell our DFC components and stacks to MTU under
this agreement. Under the Cell License Agreement, MTU also granted us an
exclusive, royalty-free license to use any of their improvements to our Direct
FuelCell that MTU developed as of December 1999 under a previous license
agreement. In addition, MTU has agreed to negotiate a license grant of any
separate carbonate fuel cell know-how it develops once it is ready for
commercialization. Under our Balance of Plant Cross Licensing and
Cross-Selling Agreement, we may sell to MTU our MW-class modules and MTU may
sell their sub-MW class modules to us. The Balance of Plant License
continues through July 2008 and may be extended for up to three additional
5-year terms, at the option of either MTU or us. As an OEM developer of
stationary fuel cell power plants, MTU assembles and stacks the DFC components
that we sell to them and then adds their mechanical and electrical balance of
plants for ultimate sale to their customers. MTU owns approximately 2.7
million shares of our common stock and is represented on our board of directors.
Marubeni
Corporation.
Marubeni delivered DFC 300A units in Japan to the Kirin Brewery near Tokyo; the
City of Fukuoka municipal wastewater treatment facility; Japex’s Katakai natural
gas gathering station located in the Niigata Prefecture; and two units to
Epson’s Quartz Device Division in the City of Ina, Nagano Perfecture, Japan.
Under
our agreement with Marubeni extended in 2004, Marubeni ordered an additional 4
MW of our DFC power plants, and to date has a commitment for 8.25 MW of our DFC
power plants. Marubeni invested $10 million in FuelCell in 2001 through
the purchase of approximately 268,000 shares. In addition, we have granted
Marubeni warrants to purchase an additional 1.0 million shares of our common
stock that vest based on order commitments for our DFC products. The
exercise prices of the warrants range from $13.78 to $18.73 per share and the
warrants will expire between April 2005 and April 2007, if not exercised sooner.
Warrants to purchase 200,000 shares have vested to date.
Late
in fiscal 2004, FuelCell and Marubeni entered into strategic alliances with
leading industrial companies to be sub-distributors and packagers of DFC
products and to participate in our cost-out program.
· |
Kawasaki
Heavy Industries. In
October 2004, Marubeni, FuelCell and Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI)
entered into an agreement for KHI to become Marubeni’s packaging partner
for Japan to design and manufacture balance of plant components, and to be
a sub-distributor to Marubeni in Japan. KHI is a leader in the field of
stationary power generation, and is a leading international supplier of
ultra-clean gas turbines. KHI has stated it believes the greatest
opportunity for DFC power plants is in high efficiency, cogeneration
applications for large commercial and light industrial sectors,
particularly due to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. As part of the
agreement, Kawasaki purchased a DFC300A power plant from Marubeni, to be
installed at the Kawasaki Akashi Works near Osaka,
Japan. |
· |
POSCO.
In November 2004, Marubeni, FuelCell and POSCO entered into an agreement
for POSCO to become Marubeni’s packaging partner for Korea to design and
manufacture balance of plant components, and to be a sub-distributor to
Marubeni in Korea. POSCO is a world leader in the materials industry, and
is a top producer of steel for the global market. POSCO has extensive
experience in power plant project development, building over 2,400 MW of
power plants, equivalent to 3.7 percent of Korea’s national capacity, for
its various facilities. As part of the agreement, POSCO purchased three
DFC300A power plants through Marubeni, with the first unit to be sited at
the Pohang University of Science and Technology in Pohang City,
Korea. |
· |
Subsequent
to the end of our fiscal year, Marubeni announced the siting of a DFC300A
power plant for Bioenergy Co. of Japan for a food recycling facility at
the Tokyo ‘Super Eco Town’ Project. |
Caterpillar,
Inc.
Caterpillar operated a DFC 300A power plant at its Technology Center near its
corporate headquarters in Peoria, Illinois and is expected to do so again in
2005. In addition, we have shipped DFC 300A power plants for two Caterpillar
customers: American Municipal Power-Ohio for a grid-support application at a
substation in the City of Westerville, Ohio, and a municipal wastewater
treatment application for the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County.
Caterpillar is currently offering our DFC products to its customers and has
stated it intends to offer its own branded fuel cell power plant that will
incorporate our DFC technology.
Under
our ten-year agreement with Caterpillar, customers are able to purchase our DFC
power plants from Caterpillar dealers in selected regions in North
America. The agreement calls for us to jointly develop Caterpillar-branded
power plants in the 250 kW to 3 MW size range, incorporating our fuel cell
modules. In December 2003, Caterpillar announced plans to market a hybrid
fuel cell/natural gas generator product which would combine our MW-class DFC
power plant with Caterpillar’s gas engine-driven generator to provide clean,
efficient and economical base load and peaking power requirements for commercial
and industrial customers.
Energy
Service Company Partners
We
have five Energy Service Company (ESCO) distribution partners for our DFC
products.
PPL
Energy Plus.
PPL, a subsidiary of PPL Corporation, ordered 1.75 MW of DFC power plants and
currently has units installed at three Starwood Resorts properties (Sheraton
Edison and Sheraton Parsippany in New Jersey and Sheraton New York Towers in
Manhattan); one unit at the U.S. Coast Guard station in Bourne, Massachusetts;
and one unit at Ocean County College in New Jersey.
Enbridge,
Inc.
Enbridge, a leader in energy transportation and distribution in North America
and internationally, entered into a three-year distribution agreement with us in
November 2003 to distribute our current DFC products in Canada. As part of
the agreement, Enbridge received warrants to purchase up to 500,000 shares of
our common stock which vest based on order commitments for our fuel cell
products. The exercise prices of the warrants range from $14.65 to $19.04 per
share and the warrants will expire in November 2006, if not exercised sooner.
These warrants have not yet vested.
Alliance
Power, Inc.
In June 2003, we signed an agreement with Alliance Power, Inc. to integrate our
‘ultra-clean’ DFC power plants into its portfolio of distributed generation
solutions. Alliance Power is a developer of distributed generation facilities
ranging in size from 1 MW to 49 MW. Alliance has been initially focusing its
efforts in California. In fiscal 2004, we announced two multi-unit projects -
500 kW for a municipal wastewater treatment facility for the City of Santa
Barbara (2 DCF300A power plants) and 1 MW for an industrial wastewater facility
for the Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. in Chico, Calif. (4 DFC300A power
plants).
Chevron
Energy Solutions.
We entered into an agreement with Chevron Energy Solutions (Chevron), a
subsidiary of ChevronTexaco, in December 2001, to jointly market and sell DFC
power plants, with initial projects targeted for the northeastern U.S. and
California. Chevron partners with institutions and businesses to improve
facilities and increase their efficiency, help reduce energy expenses and help
ensure reliability, high quality power for critical operations. In October 2004,
Chevron announced the sale of a one-MW DFC1500 power plant in California to
Alameda County for the Santa Rita Correctional Facility. In December 2004,
Chevron announced the sale of a DFC300A power plant for the U.S. Postal
Service’s San Francisco Processing and Distribution Center. Both power plants
are expected to be installed in 2005.
LOGANEnergy
Corp.
We entered into an agreement with LOGANEnergy Corp. (LOGAN) in July 2004 to
jointly market and sell DFC power plants with an initial focus on MW-class
systems in California. LOGAN has been specializing in planning, designing,
developing and implementing fuel cell projects since 1994 and has been involved
with over 40 commercial, small-scaled fuel cell projects representing more than
7 MW of capacity at 21 locations in 12 states.
Customer
Partners
Through
our field trial program, we have partnered directly with certain customers who
have hosted our product demonstrations. These customer partners have the option
to negotiate arrangements for the sale, distribution and service of our DFC
power plants upon completion of the project.
Our
longest standing customer partner relationship is with the Los Angeles
Department of Water and Power (LADWP), the largest municipal utility in the U.S.
with 640,000 water customers and 1.4 million electric customers. LADWP
participated with us on our 2 MW Santa Clara Demonstration Project in 1996-1997
and currently has three DFC 300A power plant installations (grid-connected units
at its Main Street facility and headquarters building, and a wastewater
treatment plant installation at Terminal Island).
Other
customer partners include the Alabama Municipal Electric Authority, which
participated in the operation of a sub-MW DFC power plant at a Mercedes-Benz
manufacturing facility in Tuscaloosa, Alabama and completed in December
2003.
MEETING
CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS
A
focused commercial ‘cost-out’ program cannot begin until there are a number of
units in the field operating at customer sites. We delivered our first DFC300A
power plant to the Kirin Brewery in January 2003 and since then have delivered
34 units, including our first one-MW DFC1500 and our first two-MW DFC3000, to
customer sites throughout the world. These units constitute our ‘field follow’
program.
We
went into our ‘field follow’ program anticipating there would be operational
issues that would cause service interruptions, such as fuel and water
variability, as well as site-specific issues such as temperature and altitude.
This is not uncommon with the introduction of a new technology.
Approximately
one-third of all service interruptions affecting our DFC power plant are the
result of grid disturbances. Software controls were developed to allow our units
to maintain operating temperature (hot standby mode) during these disturbances
and return to producing electricity once the grid situation was resolved.
Beyond
grid disturbances, some of the other lessons learned include fuel variations at
different sites. For example, our DFC power plants might encounter fuel
composition instability due to seasonal variations (e.g., peak-shaving gas
during winter months). In addition, industrial wastewater treatment facilities,
such as beer breweries, are subject to fuel variability depending on the type of
beer being processed which can change the hydrocarbon content of the fuel. We
resolved this by developing software controls that allow the DFC power plant to
react quickly to these changes and installing hardware to facilitate these rapid
changes.
Many
of our customers require the ability to switch fuel sources. For example, our
one-MW DFC1500 power plant at King County, Washington, switches fuel between
anaerobic digester gas and natural gas. Software controls were developed to
automate this. Similarly, our DFC300A power plant at the Kirin Brewery in Japan
switches from anaerobic digester gas to liquefied petroleum gas (during the
weekends when beer is not brewed). We developed the appropriate software
controls and installed the appropriate hardware to facilitate this.
We
have operated our DFC power plants in cold weather environments (to minus 40ºF
in Montana) and hot weather environments (120ºF in California). Appropriate
weather packages were developed and installed to minimize service interruptions
due to these temperature extremes.
Natural
gas applications incur differences in the odorants that are employed. To
accommodate for this, a new type of carbon mix was developed for the
desulfurizer beds.
From
these experiences and others, we are learning about the reliability of our DFC
power plant components in varying applications and customer environments. All
failed components are returned to our service center in Danbury and undergo
rigorous analyses. This is done to improve the reliability of the components by
allowing us and our component vendors to develop comprehensive technical
solutions. We are measuring the mean time between failure of key components to
ensure they are improving. We are also using this data to develop predictive
maintenance practices and plans.
A
year into our ‘field follow’ program, we wanted to better understand our
customer requirements. We sent out a customer satisfaction survey in which we
polled 85 percent of the operating units in the U.S. and Japan, soliciting
feedback on all aspects of our customer service, i.e., operations, engineering,
project management, quality, sales/marketing, and service. Quantitative results
produced a satisfactory rating. Additionally, our customers requested a
multi-level training program, a 24/7 customer service call center and a
web-based portal that allows them to obtain real-time power plant data. All of
these were successfully implemented in 2004. Customer feedback also indicated
that power plant size is not as important to them as the ability to service and
maintain the units. This has been incorporated into future designs and
modifications.
We
regularly monitor the availability of our DFC power plants and the average
availability of our DFC power plants to date is approximately 87 percent as of
January 10, 2005. The industry standard in the power industry for availability
is 95 percent, and we believe we will improve our availability to achieve or
exceed that benchmark.
COST
REDUCTION
Reducing
product cost is essential for us to penetrate the market for our high
temperature fuel cell products. Cost reduction will reduce and/or
eliminate the need for incentive funding programs that are currently available
to allow our product pricing to compete with grid-delivered power and other
distributed generation technologies, and is critical to achieving and sustaining
profitability. We recognized this during our initial product development efforts
leading up to our 2-MW Santa Clara ‘proof-of-concept’ project in 1996-1997. We
continued our cost reduction and performance improvement efforts as we developed
commercial designs for our products, incorporating lessons learned from this
project, our 250-kW Danbury project in 1999 as well as our U.S. field trials
with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and the Mercedes-Benz
facility in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (project partnership with Southern Company
Services, Inc., Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, the Alabama Electric
Authority) in 2001-2002. Cost per kW was declining substantially during this
period, from over $20,000 per kW to approximately $10,000 per kW at the start of
commercial ‘cost-out’ program in mid-2003.
A
more focused commercial ‘cost-out’ program, however, could not commence until we
had a number of units in the field. Six months into our ‘field-follow’ program
we concluded that our DFC power plants were meeting customer expectations and we
decided to move forward with our ‘cost-out’ program.
Our
value-engineering cost reduction program commenced in mid-2003 and is focused on
reducing initial capital costs of the products as well as testing, conditioning,
installation, operation and maintenance expenses. We expect further cost
reductions from increasing volume production above our current levels. Product
cost reduction comes from three areas - our ‘field follow’ program, our
‘cost-out’ program and our ‘performance improvement’ program. Engineers and
scientists are dedicated to each area, but it is a collaborative effort that
contributes to the overall serviceability, cost-reduction and performance
improvement of our DFC products. We have created an interdepartmental team that
regularly analyzes, verifies and tests value-engineering initiatives. Presently,
approximately 20 percent of our employees are involved in this ‘cost-out’
program, including a staff of 20 engineers dedicated exclusively to this effort,
and contributions are solicited and considered from our distribution partners,
component suppliers, packaging engineering firms and directly from end-use
customers. In addition, we expect to leverage the capabilities and resources of
our distribution partners and key suppliers to enhance our cost reduction
efforts. These continuing efforts are expected to reduce material costs,
simplify design, improve manufacturing yields, reduce product assembly labor and
reduce production cycle time.
Selected
examples of successful cost reduction initiatives include changing the material
of our bipolar plates and reforming unit separators within our fuel cells,
switching our piping material, changing our nitrogen purging methodologies in
our sub-MW product balance of plant, and substituting a standard shipping
container for the custom-made balance of plant enclosure. We are building global
sourcing capabilities for the most cost effective component and material supply.
We
have achieved significant cost reductions since the program’s inception. Product
design changes are introduced in blocks rather than individually to minimize
impact to manufacturing and to the customer. For example, in 2004 we reduced the
cost of our DFC300A power plant by approximately 25 percent in two block
changes. Block One changes were released into production beginning in late
calendar year 2004 and block two changes will be implemented in products
released for production in the summer of 2005.
Concurrent
with our field follow and cost-out programs, we continue to advance the
performance of our core stack technology to increase power output and extend
stack life. Increasing power output will reduce the initial capital cost
per/kW and increasing stack life will reduce operation and maintenance costs to
make our products even more competitive. Subscale testing of our carbonate fuel
cells has successfully demonstrated an increase in power output. Efforts are
underway to validate these advances in larger stacks before we incorporate these
improvements into our commercial DFC products.
Recently,
we have demonstrated trouble-free operation of our DFC power plants on U.S.
commercial grade propane, a commonly available storable fuel that potential
customers are telling us is required for certain critical power applications. We
plan to operate a DFC300A unit on propane in 2005 to show readiness for critical
power/Homeland Security applications. Field operating experience has shown that
plant trips from grid-related disturbances are a significant factor contributing
to plant outages. To alleviate the impact of this, we have demonstrated going
from a trip disturbance to hot standby followed with full power recovery in less
than ten minutes in a full-scale engineering unit subsequent to a grid
disturbance-related outage. This feature will be incorporated into the product
in 2005.
We
have established value-engineering cost targets of 20 to 25 percent for each
year through 2006. The cost of our standard sub-MW product design at the end of
2004 was reduced from over $8,000 per kW to approximately $6,000 per kW, which
is a 25 percent reduction in cost. Our MW-class products have an inherent 20 to
25 percent cost advantage over the sub-MW product due to economies of scale of
the balance-of-plant and other components. We believe that increasing our annual
production volume to our production capacity of 50 MW can yield up to 30 percent
of additional cost reduction. Realization of these cost reductions in our
financial statements is dependent upon inventory levels, procurement and
production decisions and order flow. We believe that we can reach market
clearing prices in the higher energy cost regions of the world.
Manufacturing,
Service, Testing and Conditioning
We
have established a 65,000 square foot manufacturing facility in Torrington,
Connecticut where, since 2001, we have produced our repeating fuel cell
components: the anode and cathode electrodes and the electrolyte matrix. After
the components have been produced, they are combined in sub-assembly operations
to create the final fuel cell package and delivered to final assembly for
stacking into our 250 kW (nominal rating) building block stacks, which comprise
our fuel cell modules. These modules are then delivered to our test and
conditioning facilities in Danbury, Connecticut, and combined with the balance
of plant to complete our DFC300A power plants. The completed DFC300A power plant
is tested and conditioned in Danbury before being shipped to the customer site.
Our MW-modules for the DFC1500 and DFC3000 are tested in Danbury and then
shipped to the customer site for final testing with an assembled balance of
plant.
Our
manufacturing, testing and conditioning facilities have equipment in place for a
production capacity of 50 MW per year. We believe manufacturing capacity can be
increased to 125 - 150 MW within our existing Torrington facility through the
addition of parallel production lines and additional machinery. We also have
additional land access surrounding our Torrington facility, on which we could
expand to 400 MW of annual production of our repeating fuel cell components.
Expansion of our manufacturing facilities beyond 50 MW would also require new
facilities for the fuel cell stack and module assembly, test and conditioning
which could be deployed regionally. These regional assembly, test and
conditioning facilities are expected to provide additional cost savings as they
will reduce shipping costs, enhance delivery times and improve customer service.
Our
service organization offers comprehensive service and maintenance programs
including total fleet management, refurbishment and recycling services, and
complete product support including spare parts inventory. We are offering
service agreements at various levels for one to five years, with flexible
renewal options. Our service business is located at our Danbury
facility.
Government
Regulation
We
presently are, and our fuel cell power plants will be, subject to various
federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to, among other things,
land use, safe working conditions, handling and disposal of hazardous and
potentially hazardous substances and emissions of pollutants into the
atmosphere. Emissions of SOX and NOX from our fuel cell power plants will be
much lower than conventional combustion-based generating stations, and are well
within existing and proposed regulatory limits. The primary emissions from our
DFC power plants, assuming no cogeneration application, is humid flue gas that
is discharged at a temperature of approximately 700-800° F, water that will be
discharged at a temperature of approximately 10-20° F above ambient air
temperatures and carbon dioxide at levels below many competing technologies
because of our high efficiency. In light of the high temperature of the gas
emissions, we will likely be required by regulatory authorities to site or
configure our power plants in a way that will allow the gas to be vented at
acceptable and safe distances. We believe that this regulation of the gas
emissions will be similar to the regulation of other power plants with similar
heat and discharge temperatures. The discharge of water from our power plants
will likely require permits whose terms will depend on whether the water is
permitted to be discharged into a storm drain or into the local wastewater
system. Lastly, as with any use of hydrocarbon fuel, the discharge of
particulates will have to meet emissions standards. While our products have very
low carbon monoxide emissions, there could be additional permitting requirements
in smog non-attainment areas with respect to carbon monoxide if a number of our
units are aggregated together.
Proprietary
Rights and Licensed Technology
To
compete in the marketplace, align effectively with business partners and protect
our proprietary rights, we rely primarily on a combination of trade secrets,
patents, confidentiality procedures and agreements and patent assignment
agreements. In this regard, we have 40 current U.S. patents (including four
allowed awaiting issuance by the Patent and Trademark Office) and 89
international patents covering our fuel cell technology (in certain cases
covering the same technology in multiple jurisdictions). All of the 40 U.S.
patents relate to our Direct FuelCell technology. We also have submitted 27 U.S.
and 85 international patent applications.
The
patents we have obtained will expire between 2005 and 2023, and the average
remaining life of our patents is approximately 10.6 years. In 2004, two new U.S
patents were issued, four more were allowed and four U.S. patents expired. The
expiration of these patents has no material impact on our current or anticipated
operations. We also have 19 invention disclosures in process with our patent
counsel that may result in additional patent applications.
Many
of our U.S. patents are the result of government-funded research and development
programs, including the DOE cooperative agreement. Three of our patents, which
resulted from government-funded research before January 1988 (when we qualified
as a “small business”), are owned by the U.S. government and have been licensed
to us.
U.S.
patents that we own that resulted from government-funded research are subject to
the government exercising “march-in” rights. We believe, however, that the
likelihood of the U.S. government exercising these rights is remote and would
only occur if we ceased our commercialization efforts and there was a compelling
national need to use the patents.
We
have also entered into certain license agreements through which we have obtained
the rights to use technology developed under joint projects. Through these
agreements we must make certain royalty payments on the sales of products that
contain the licensed technology, subject to certain milestones and
limitations.
Competition
We
compete on the basis of our products’ reliability, fuel efficiency,
environmental considerations and cost. We believe that our DFC carbonate
fuel cell offers competitive advantages over most other fuel cell designs for
stationary base load power generation. These benefits include high fuel
efficiency, significantly lower emissions, scalability, the proven ability to
utilize multiple fuels and potentially lower operating, maintenance and
generation costs. We believe that we are the most advanced high
temperature stationary fuel cell company.
Several
companies in the U.S. are involved in fuel cell development, although we believe
we are the only domestic company engaged in significant manufacturing and
commercialization of carbonate fuel cells in the sub-MW and MW classes. Emerging
fuel cell technologies (and companies developing them) include PEM fuel cells
(Ballard Power Systems, Inc.; UTC Fuel Cells; and Plug Power), phosphoric acid
fuel cells (UTC Fuel Cells) and solid oxide fuel cells (Siemens Westinghouse
Electric Company, Sulzer Hexis, McDermott, GE/Honeywell, Delphi and
Accumentrics). Each of these competitors has the potential to capture
market share in our target markets.
There
are other potential carbonate fuel cell competitors internationally. In
Asia, Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries is active in developing carbonate
fuel cells. In Europe, a company in Italy, Ansaldo Fuel Cells, is actively
engaged in carbonate fuel cell development and is a potential competitor. Our
licensees in Germany, MTU, and its partners have been the most active in
Europe.
Other
than fuel cell developers, we must also compete with such companies as
Caterpillar, Cummins Inc., and Detroit Diesel Corporation (a subsidiary of
DaimlerChrysler AG), which manufacture more mature combustion-based equipment,
including various engines and turbines, and have more established manufacturing,
distribution, operating and cost features. Significant competition may
also come from gas turbine companies like General Electric, Ingersoll-Rand
Company Limited, Solar Turbines Incorporated and Kawasaki, which have recently
made progress in improving fuel efficiency and reducing pollution in large-size
combined cycle natural gas fueled generators. These companies have also made
efforts to extend these advantages to smaller sizes. We believe, however,
that these smaller gas turbines will not be able to match our fuel efficiency or
favorable environmental characteristics.
Research
and Development
The
goal of our research and development efforts is to improve our core DFC products
and expand our technology portfolio in complementary high temperature fuel cell
systems, such as SOFC. In addition, we are also conducting limited
development work on advanced applications for other fuel cell technologies, such
as PEM. A significant portion of our research and development has been funded by
government contracts and is classified as cost of research and development
contracts in our consolidated financial statements. For the fiscal years ended
2004, 2003 and 2002, total research and development expenses, including amounts
received from the DOE, other government departments and agencies and our
customers, and amounts that have been self-funded, were $44.9 million, $44.3
million and $52.5 million, respectively.
Government
Research and Development Contracts
Since
1975, we have worked on the development of our DFC technology with various U.S.
government departments and agencies, including the DOE, the Navy, the Coast
Guard, the Department of Defense, the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Defense Advance Research Projects Agency and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. Government funding, principally from the DOE, provided
approximately 60 percent, 52 percent, and 81 percent of our revenue for the
fiscal years ended 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. From the inception
of our carbonate fuel cell development program in the mid-1970s to date,
approximately $450 million has been invested to support the development of our
DFC technology. This includes approximately $280 million from government
agencies, with the balance provided by private entities such as FuelCell,
utility organizations and licensees.
DFC
Programs
Product
Design Improvement (PDI) In
1994, we entered into a cooperative agreement with the DOE to focus on our DFC
technology and system optimization for cost reduction, product design
development and fuel cell system field trials. Since 1994, the aggregate
dollar amount expended under the DOE contract is approximately $213 million,
with the DOE providing approximately $135 million in funding. Work under this
agreement was completed in 2004.
King
County, Washington In
2001, we signed an agreement with King County, Washington to deliver a 1 MW DFC
1500 power plant to operate on anaerobic digester gas from its municipal
wastewater treatment facility. This MW-class field trial demonstration,
with a total project value of approximately $18.8 million, is cost-shared by
King County through a cooperative grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and us. We began operating the unit on natural gas in July 2004 and
then switched to anaerobic digester gas in August 2004. This demonstration
project is expected to run through 2006.
Clean
Coal Project In
July 2002, we received approval from the DOE to accelerate the demonstration of
our 2 MW DFC 3000 power plant operating on synthesis gas derived from
coal. The total value of the project is $34.6 million, with 50 percent of
the cost shared by the DOE. We installed the DFC3000 power plant at a coal
gasification site in Indiana in July 2004 and expect to begin operating the unit
when the gasification facility is operational. Coal is the dominant fuel for
electric power generation in the U.S., with a little more than 50 percent of the
power coming from coal-fired plants in 2002.
Ohio
Coal Mine Methane Project In
2000, we were selected by the DOE’s National Energy Technology Laboratory to
demonstrate the ability of DFC power plants to generate electricity using
coalmine methane emissions that otherwise escape into the atmosphere. We
delivered a sub-MW DFC power plant to an AEP Ohio Coal LLC Rose Valley Site in
Hopedale, Ohio in August 2003 and completed the successful operation phase of
this project in December 2003.
Future
Products
Direct
FuelCell/Turbine In
October 2002, we received a modification to our existing Vision 21 program
agreement with the DOE to demonstrate two additional sub-MW power plants based
on our DFC/T technology. This modification provides an additional $16
million to the budget, cost-shared by the DOE and us. We will test the
first DFC/T at our facility in Danbury, Connecticut and demonstrate the second
DFC/T plant in Montana. In fiscal year 2004, we successfully completed our
proof-of-concept test of a 250 kW power plant integrated with a 60 kW micro
turbine, and completed the design of our first packaged sub-MW alpha unit. This
power plant will be assembled for factory testing in Danbury in the third
calendar quarter of 2005. In this patented technology, heat generated by
the fuel cell is used to drive an unfired modified micro turbine to generate
additional electricity. The ultimate objective of this program is the
design of a 10 to 40 MW DFC/T power plant that is expected to approach the 75
percent efficiency goal specified by the DOE’s Vision 21 program. The
DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy established its Vision 21 Program in 1999 with the
objective of developing a “21st Century Energy Plant” that can generate
electricity, heat/steam, clean fuels, chemicals and hydrogen from a variety of
feedstocks such as fossil fuels and biomass with high efficiency and low
environmental impact.
DFC
Marine/Diesel We
are currently working on marine applications of our DFC products under programs
with the U.S. Navy. These ship service fuel cell (SSFC) power plants are
required to operate on liquid fuels such as diesel. We have a contract
with the Office of Naval Research to deliver a 500 kW SSFC power plant for
land-based demonstration at the Naval Sea Systems Command in Philadelphia.
We have assembled the balance of plant process equipment for the DFC power plant
and initiated testing in Danbury. Upon successful completion of this phase of
the project, the balance of plant will be integrated with two 250-kW fuel cell
stacks. The complete power plant is expected to be tested in Danbury during the
summer of 2005. This $21.6 million cost-shared project started in 2000 and is a
continuation of an earlier $4.6 million contract that completed the conceptual
design and testing of the critical components for the marine fuel cell
module.
Additionally,
we are performing a number of smaller contracts related to the development of
SSFC products. In October 2003, we received a $954,000 subcontract award
for a supplemental program. Specific tasks for this program include the
design engineering for installing diesel-fueled DFC power plants at naval
facilities and on ships, operational testing of a DFC 300A power plant in
Danbury from a control center in Maine, and development of a marine fuel cell
simulator for use as an operator training aid. We expect that
successful demonstration of this project can lead to additional diesel fuel cell
power plant applications for commercial ships and island power
generation.
SECA
Program In
September 2004, we entered into a contract with the DOE to lead a project team
for its SECA program. The goal of the SECA program is to accelerate the
commercialization of low-cost solid oxide fuel cells, a part of the DOE’s
commitment to developing clean, efficient, reliable and affordable power
generation. We plan to do this by reducing the operating temperature of the SOFC
system to introduce cheaper materials in its construction and extend the
operating life of the SOFC systems. The FuelCell team members currently include
Versa, Materials and Systems Research, Inc. (MSRI), University of Utah (UU), Gas
Technology Institute (GTI), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Dana
Corporation (Dana) and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). Additional
SECA industrial team leaders include Acumentrics, Cummins Power Generation,
Delphi Automotive Systems, General Electric Power Systems, and Siemens
Westinghouse Power Corporation.
The
10-year, $139 million program has three phases. The first phase will develop
stationary modules in the 3 to 10 kilowatt size range and scalable systems for
applications up to 100 kW operating on natural gas with target efficiencies of
45 percent. Phase one is a three-year, $24 million program to be cost-shared by
the DOE ($15 million) and the FuelCell team ($9 million). This contract for this
first phase was finalized in September 2004.
Phases
two and three will focus on enhancing system efficiencies to 50 percent and 55
percent, respectively, as well as operating on additional fuels such as propane
and diesel. The development of hybrid power plants combining fuel cells with
turbines and stirling engines will also be evaluated in the latter phases.
These latter two phases are also to be cost shared by the DOE ($52 million) and
the project’s participants ($63 million). Advancement to these stages is
dependent upon successes achieved in Phase one, selection by the DOE as a
continuing project participant and subsequent congressional
appropriations.
On
November 1, 2004, we consolidated our Canadian SOFC operations into Versa in
exchange for stock in Versa, increasing our ownership interest from 16 percent
to 42 percent. We believe consolidating SOFC development into a single entity
provides a greater opportunity to commercialize SOFC products under the DOE’s
SECA program.
Versa,
founded in 1991, is a joint venture of GTI, EPRI, UU, MSRI and FuelCell. Versa’s
proprietary intellectual property (19 patents and pending patent applications),
mutually developed and owned by the joint venture partners, includes a patented
planar SOFC system and process that uses a unique cell configuration and
components designed to enable operation at much lower temperature with increased
power density.
Our
former Canadian SOFC operations, part of Global Thermoelectric Inc. acquired in
November 2003, initiated its SOFC research and development program in 1997. This
Canadian SOFC operation has developed a key proprietary fuel cell design and
pilot manufacturing processes and methods. This cell design, combined with
advanced stack technology, is now being tested in complete systems, with a focus
on the development of stationary natural gas-fueled prototypes.
We
continue as a prime contractor under SECA and we are collaborating with Versa
and other partners on SOFC systems development. Versa established its
headquarters in Colorado and continues technology development in Calgary,
Alberta, Canada. A 2-kW SOFC system is currently being tested as part of
expected delivery of a 3-kilowatt system for the DOE in 2006.
Target
markets for these SOFC products include remote sites, telecommunications
facilities, commercial and residential buildings, back-up, mobile standby and
auxiliary power units. If successfully commercialized, these SOFC products,
ranging in size from 3-kW to 100-kW, will be complementary to our larger-scaled
DFC power plants, ranging in size from 250-kW to 2-MW, that we are delivering to
commercial, industrial and government customers today.
BACKLOG
Our
backlog as of October 31, 2004 was approximately $47 million compared with
backlog of approximately $46 million as of October 31, 2003. Backlog refers to
the aggregate revenues remaining to be earned at a specified date under
contracts we hold. For U.S. government contracts, we include the total contract
value including any unfunded portion of the total contract value in backlog.
U.S. government contract backlog was approximately $16 million and $31 million
as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The unfunded portion of our U.S.
government contracts amounted to approximately $4 million and $17 million
respectively as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Due to the long-term
nature of our government contracts, fluctuations from year to year are not an
indication of any future trend. Although backlog reflects business that is
considered firm, cancellations or scope adjustments may occur and will be
reflected in our backlog when known. Product order backlog was approximately $26
million and $15 million as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Product
orders represent approximately 62 percent of our total funded backlog.
EMPLOYEES
As
of March 31, 2005, we had 326 full-time employees, of whom 93 were located at
the Torrington, Connecticut manufacturing plant, and 233 were located at the
Danbury, Connecticut facility or various field offices. All employees in our
SOFC business were transferred to Versa Power Systems, Inc. effective November
1, 2004 and are not included in these numbers.
PROPERTIES
Our
headquarters are located in Danbury, Connecticut. The following is a summary of
our offices and locations:
Location |
|
Business
Use |
|
Square
Footage |
|
Lease
Expiration Dates |
Danbury,
Connecticut |
|
Corporation
Headquarters, Research and Development, Sales, Marketing, Purchasing and
Administration |
|
72,000 |
|
Company
owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Torrington,
Connecticut |
|
Manufacturing |
|
65,000 |
|
December
2010 (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Danbury,
Connecticut |
|
Manufacturing
and Operations |
|
38,000 |
|
October
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pasadena,
California |
|
Sales
& Marketing |
|
200 |
|
June
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calgary,
Alberta, Canada |
|
Research
and Development |
|
103,000 |
|
January
2006(2) |
(1)
We have an option to extend the lease for an additional five years.
(2)
Facilities acquired with the acquisition of Global Thermoelectric Inc. on
November 3, 2003 for which we have remaining lease obligations. We are currently
sub-leasing part of this facility to Versa Power Systems, Inc.
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
We
are not currently a party to any legal proceedings that, either individually or
taken as a whole, we believe could materially harm our business, prospects,
results of operations or financial condition.
MANAGEMENT
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS OF FUELCELL
Our
executive officers and their ages are as follows:
NAME |
AGE |
POSITION
WITH FUELCELL |
Jerry
D. Leitman
|
62
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
|
R.
Daniel Brdar
|
45
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Dr.
Hansraj C. Maru
|
60
|
Executive
Vice President, Chief Technical Officer
|
Christopher
R. Bentley
|
62
|
Executive
Vice President, Chief Operating Officer
|
Joseph
G. Mahler
|
52
|
Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer & Corporate
Secretary
|
Herbert
T. Nock |
55 |
Senior
Vice President of Marketing and Sales |
Jerry
D. Leitman. Mr.
Leitman has been our President and Chief Executive Officer since August 1997 and
became Chairman of our board of directors in June 2002. Mr. Leitman was
previously President of Jaydell Inc., a personal investment-Sub S Corporation
from 1995 to 1997. From 1992 to 1995, Mr. Leitman was President of Asea Brown
Boveri’s (ABB) global air pollution control businesses. Prior to joining ABB,
Mr. Leitman was Group Executive Vice President of FLAKT AB, a Swedish
multinational company, responsible for FLAKT’s worldwide industrial businesses
from 1989 to 1992. Mr. Leitman is also a Director and Chairman of the
compensation committee of Esterline Technologies Inc.
R.
Daniel Brdar. Mr.
Brdar became our Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer in
February 2005. Mr. Brdar joined us in January 2001 as Vice President of
Distributor Operations and became Vice President of Product Development in June
2003. Prior to joining FuelCell, Mr. Brdar was the Gas Turbine Product Manager
for General Electric's (GE) Power Systems business. Before joining GE, he led
the U.S. Department of Energy’s Power Systems Product Management organization.
Mr. Brdar received his BS in Engineering from the University of Pittsburgh in
1981.
Dr.
Hansraj C. Maru.
Dr. Maru has been our Executive Vice President since December 1992 and was
appointed our Chief Technology Officer in August 2000. Mr. Maru was a
director of FuelCell from December 1992 to March 2004. Dr. Maru was Chief
Operating Officer from December 1992 to December 1997. Prior to that he was
Senior Vice President—Research and Development. Prior to joining us in 1977, Dr.
Maru was involved in fuel cell development at the Institute of Gas Technology.
Dr. Maru received a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the Illinois Institute of
Technology in 1975.
Christopher
R. Bentley.
Mr. Bentley has been our Executive Vice President since September 1990 and our
Chief Operating Officer since August 2000. Mr. Bentley was a director of
FuelCell from June 1993 to March 2004. Mr. Bentley was President of Fuel Cell
Manufacturing Corporation, our former subsidiary, from September 1990 to
December 1997. From 1985 through 1989, he was Director of Manufacturing (1985),
Vice President and General Manager (1985-1988) and President (1988-1989) of the
Turbine Airfoils Division of Chromalloy Gas Turbine Corporation, a major
manufacturer of gas turbine hardware. Mr. Bentley received a BSME from Tufts
University in 1966.
Joseph
G. Mahler.
Mr. Mahler joined us in October 1998 as Senior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer, Corporate Secretary and Treasurer. Mr. Mahler worked for Ernst &
Young from 1974 - 1992 in the New York and Hartford offices. In Hartford, he was
a partner in the Entrepreneurial Services Group. From 1993 to 1998, Mr. Mahler
was Vice President—Chief Financial Officer at Earthgro, Inc. Mr. Mahler received
a BS in Accounting from Boston College in 1974.
Herbert
T. Nock.
Mr. Nock joined us in August 2000 as Senior Vice President of Marketing and
Sales. Mr. Nock previously worked for General Electric’s Power Systems business
for 29 years, most recently as Product General Manager for small gas turbine
products. Mr. Nock received his BS in Mechanical Engineering from Worcester
Polytechnic Institute in 1971 and his MBA from Boston University in
1977.
We
have a Code of Ethics, as defined in SEC rules, that applies to our principal
executive officer, our principal financial officer and our principal accounting
officer.
DIRECTORS
OF FUELCELL
Our
directors and their ages are as follows:
NAME |
AGE |
DIRECTOR
SINCE |
Jerry
D. Leitman |
62 |
1997 |
Warren
D. Bagatelle |
66 |
1988 |
Michael
Bode |
60 |
1993 |
Thomas
R. Casten |
62 |
2000 |
James
D. Gerson |
61 |
1992 |
Thomas
L. Kempner |
77 |
1988 |
William
A. Lawson |
71 |
1988 |
Charles
J. Murphy |
57 |
2002 |
George
K. Petty |
63 |
2003 |
John
A. Rolls |
63 |
2000 |
Jerry
D. Leitman. Mr.
Leitman has been our President and Chief Executive Officer since August 1997 and
became Chairman of our board of directors in June 2002. Mr. Leitman was
previously President of Jaydell Inc., a personal investment-Sub S Corporation
from 1995 to 1997. From 1992 to 1995, Mr. Leitman was President of Asea Brown
Boveri’s (ABB) global air pollution control businesses. Prior to joining ABB,
Mr. Leitman was Group Executive Vice President of FLAKT AB, a Swedish
multinational company, responsible for FLAKT’s worldwide industrial businesses
from 1989 to 1992. Mr. Leitman is also a Director and Chairman of the
compensation committee of Esterline Technologies Inc.
Warren
D. Bagatelle.
Mr. Bagatelle has been a Managing Director of Loeb Partners Corporation since
1988 and a general partner of Loeb Investors Co. LXXV, an investment partnership
and an affiliate of Loeb Partners Corporation. Mr.
Bagatelle is a Director of Electro Energy, Inc.
Michael
Bode.
Mr. Bode became Chief Executive Officer of MTU CFC Solutions GmbH, a company of
Daimler Chrysler, AG, in January 2003. Mr. Bode was Executive Vice President and
Director of the New Technology Group of MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH from July 1993
to February 2003. From 1990 to 1993, Mr. Bode was Vice President and Director of
the New Technology group of the Space Transportation and Propulsion Systems
division of Deutsche Aerospace AG a subsidiary of Daimler-Benz Corp. Mr. Bode
joined Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm GmbH in 1974, where he held a variety of
positions. Mr. Bode serves as a Director of BI New Energy
Solutions.
Thomas
R. Casten.
Mr. Casten currently serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Primary
Energy Ventures, LLC, which has, via its predecessor Private Power LLC, been in
operation since 2001. From 1989 to 2000, Mr. Casten was President and Chief
Executive Officer of Trigen Energy Corporation, a company involved in
alternative energy generation. Mr. Casten is the Chairman of the World Alliance
for Decentralized Energy working to advance distributed power worldwide. Mr.
Casten serves as a Director of Primary Energy Holdings, LLC.
James
D. Gerson.
Mr. Gerson is a private investor. He was Vice President of Oppenheimer & Co.
(formerly Fahnestock & Co., Inc.) from March 1993 until April 2003, where he
held a variety of positions in the corporate finance, research, and portfolio
management areas. Mr. Gerson also serves as a Director of American Power
Conversion Corp. and is Chairman of the Board of Evercel, Inc.
Thomas
L. Kempner.
Mr. Kempner was Chairman of our board of directors from March 1992 to August
1997. He has been Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Loeb Partners
Corporation since 1979 and a general partner of Loeb Investors Co. LXXV, an
investment partnership and an affiliate of Loeb Partners Corporation. Mr.
Kempner is also a Director of IGENE
Biotechnology, Inc., Intermagnetics
General Corporation, CCC Information Services Group, Inc., Insight
Communications Company, Inc., Dyax
Corporation, and Intersections, Inc. and Director Emeritus of Northwest
Airlines, Inc.
William
A. Lawson.
Mr. Lawson has been President of W.A. Lawson Associates, an industrial and
financial consulting firm, since 1987. Mr. Lawson is past Chairman of the board
of directors of Newcor, Inc. Mr. Lawson is a Director of Evercel,
Inc.
Charles
J. Murphy.
Mr. Murphy is currently a Senior Advisor at Credit Suisse First Boston as well
as an Adjunct Professor at NYU's Stern School of Business. Over the last several
years he has worked as a senior investment banker/advisor at Allegheny Energy,
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith and J.P. Morgan, specifically in the
Energy, Power and Energy Technology areas. From 1976 to 1996, Mr. Murphy was an
investment banker at Credit Suisse First Boston where he was a member of the
Executive Board, the head of the Global Equity Department and co-head of the
Investment Banking Department.
George
K. Petty.
Mr. Petty has been Chairman and President of AmCan, Inc., a corporation
specializing in the telecommunications field since 1999. Mr. Petty was President
and Chief Executive Officer of Telus Corporation, a Canadian telecommunications
company, from 1994 to 1999. Previously, he was Vice President of Global Business
Service for AT&T and Chairman of the Board of World Partners, the Global
Telecom Alliance. Mr. Petty is a Director of AmCan, Inc, Enbridge, Inc.,
Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P, Enbridge Energy Management, Inc. and Enbridge
Energy Company, Inc.
John
A. Rolls. Mr.
Rolls has been President, Chief Executive Officer and a principal investor in
Thermion Systems International since 1996. He is a Director and Chairman of the
Finance Committee of both Bowater Inc. and MBIA Inc. Mr. Rolls was President and
Chief Executive Officer of Deutsche Bank North America from 1992 through 1996.
From 1986 through 1992, Mr. Rolls was Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer for United Technologies Corp. Previously, he was Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of RCA Corporation.
Our
bylaws provide that our board of directors shall have between 3 and 16 members,
as determined from time to time by resolution of the board. Our board currently
has ten members, all of whom were elected at our 2004 Annual Meeting held on
March 30, 2004. We have agreed to nominate Jerry D. Leitman as a director
pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement. We have agreed to allow
Enbridge, Inc. to nominate one member to our board of directors until February
2008. George K. Petty currently serves as the nominee of Enbridge.
Committees
of the Board of Directors
Our
board of directors has established four committees: the audit committee, the
compensation committee, the nominating committee and the executive committee.
Audit
Committee
The
audit committee is composed of three independent directors under applicable
Nasdaq and SEC rules. Members of the audit committee are appointed by the
board.
The
audit committee is responsible for, among other things:
· |
appointing,
establishing the compensation for, supervising and, where appropriate,
replacing our independent accountants; |
· |
considering
the qualifications and independence of our independent
accountants; |
· |
approving
all audit and non-audit services provided by our independent accountants;
and |
· |
reviewing
and discussing our financial statements with management and our
independent accountants. |
Our
independent accountants are required to report directly to the audit
committee. The audit committee also reviews our accounting policies,
internal control procedures and systems and compliance activities and also
reviews the charter of the audit committee.
The
board of directors has determined that at least one of the independent directors
serving on the Audit Committee, Warren D. Bagatelle, is an audit committee
financial expert, as the Securities and Exchange Commission has defined that
term.
Compensation
Committee
The
compensation committee is composed of four independent directors under
applicable Nasdaq rules. Members of the compensation committee are
appointed by the board.
The
compensation committee is responsible for implementing and reviewing executive
compensation plans, policies and programs in an effort to ensure the attraction
and retention of executive officers in a reasonable and cost-effective manner,
to motivate their performance in the achievement of our business objectives and
to align the interests of our executive officers with the long-term interests of
our shareholders. To that end, it is the responsibility of the compensation
committee to develop and approve periodically a general compensation policy and
salary structure for our executive officers which considers business and
financial objectives, industry and market pay practices and such other
information as may be deemed appropriate. It is also the responsibility of
the compensation committee to:
· |
review
and recommend for approval by our independent directors the compensation
(salary, bonus and incentive compensation) of our chief executive officer
and review and approve the compensation (salary, bonus and incentive
compensation) of our other executive
officers; |
· |
review
and approve perquisites offered to our executive
officers; |
· |
review
and approve corporate goals and objectives relevant to the compensation of
our executive officers and evaluate performance in light of the goals and
objectives; and |
· |
review
and approve employment, retention and severance agreements for our
executive officers. |
The
compensation committee also:
· |
acts
on behalf of the board in administering compensation plans approved by the
board and/or our shareholders in a manner consistent with the terms of the
plans; |
· |
reviews
and makes recommendations to the board with respect to new compensation
incentive plans and equity-based plans; and |
· |
reviews
and make recommendations to the board on changes in major benefit programs
for our executive officers. |
The
compensation committee also reviews the management succession program for our
chief executive officer and certain of our other executive officers.
Nominating
Committee
The
nominating committee is composed of four independent directors under applicable
Nasdaq rules. Members of the nominating committee are appointed by
the board.
The
principal purpose of the nominating committee is to identify individuals
qualified to become members of the board and recommend the persons to be
nominated by the board for election as directors at the annual meeting of
shareholders.
In
addition, the nominating committee:
· |
is
responsible for identifying individuals to be elected by the board to fill
any vacancies on the board; |
· |
is
responsible for reviewing with the board, on an annual basis, the
requisite skills and criteria for new board members as well as the
composition of the board as a whole; and |
· |
is
required to review the qualifications and backgrounds of all directors and
nominees as well as the overall composition of the board of directors,
and
recommend a slate of directors to be nominated for election at the annual
meeting of shareholders, or in the case of a vacancy on our board of
directors, recommend a director to be elected by our board to fill this
vacancy.
|
Executive
Committee
The
executive committee is comprised of Jerry D. Leitman, our president, chief
executive officer and chairman, and three other directors. The executive
committee is authorized to exercise the general powers of the board managing our
business and affairs between meetings of the full board.
Director
Compensation
Each
director not employed by us, except for Michael Bode, receives $10,000 per
annum. New directors also receive 40,000 non-qualified stock options upon
acceptance to the board. The stock options are granted pursuant to our 1998
Equity Incentive Plan. The options are exercisable commencing one year after
grant, vest at the rate of 25% per year from date of grant and have restrictions
as to transferability. An additional $3,000 per annum is paid to the Chairman
and $2,000 per annum is paid to each non-employee member of the Executive,
Nomination, Compensation and Audit Committees. We reimburse directors for
reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the performance of their duties
as directors.
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
Annual
and Long-Term Compensation
Summary
Compensation Table
The
following table sets forth the annual and long-term compensation for services in
all capacities to FuelCell for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, of those persons who were at October
31, 2004
(i) the
Chief Executive Officer and (ii) the four other most highly compensated
executive officers of FuelCell.
|
|
|
|
LONG
TERM
COMPENSATION AWARDS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SECURITIES
UNDERLYING OPTIONS
# |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry
D. Leitman |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
388,250 |
|
|
186,000 |
|
|
-0- |
|
|
14,014 |
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
383,711 |
|
|
180,500 |
|
|
-0- |
|
|
19,571 |
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
373,888 |
|
|
180,000 |
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher
R. Bentley |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
274,673 |
|
|
65,750 |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
11,663 |
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
271,269 |
|
|
63,750 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
15,752 |
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
261,908 |
|
|
76,000 |
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.
Daniel Brdar |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
183,885 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
35,000 |
|
|
9,341 |
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
160,529 |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
24,810 |
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
135,714 |
|
|
35,000 |
|
|
34,000 |
|
|
7,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph
G. Mahler |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
237,154 |
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
11,480 |
|
Senior
Vice President |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
234,731 |
|
|
55,000 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
15,242 |
|
Chief
Financial Officer Corporate Secretary and Treasurer |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
226,161 |
|
|
67,000 |
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hansraj
C. Maru |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
216,135 |
|
|
50,700 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
10,385 |
|
Executive
Vice President and Chief Technology Officer |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
215,983 |
|
|
47,000 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
14,838 |
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
209,405 |
|
|
53,000 |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
18,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herbert
T. Nock |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
207,981 |
|
|
47,500 |
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
10,192 |
|
Senior
Vice President, Marketing and Sales |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
204,923 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
14,905 |
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
|
193,914 |
|
|
53,000 |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
21,090 |
|
(1)
Represents employer contributions to the Defined Contribution Pension
Plan
and
employer contributions to the Section 401(k) Plan.
Prior
to February 14, 2005, Mr. Bentley was Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer. On February 14, 2005, Mr. Bentley became Executive Vice
President, Government R & D Operations and Strategic Manufacturing
Development.
Prior
to February 14, 2005, Mr. Brdar was Vice President of Product Development. On
February 14, 2005, Mr. Brdar became Executive Vice President and Chief Operating
Officer.
The
following two tables set forth certain information with respect to (i) option
grants to the named executive officers of FuelCell during the fiscal year ended
October 31, 2004, and (ii) the aggregated number and value of options
exercisable and unexercisable by the named executive officers as of October 31,
2004.
Option
Grants in Last Fiscal Year
NAME |
|
NUMBER
OF SECURITIES UNDERLYING OPTIONS/SARs GRANTED (1)
|
|
PERCENT
OF
TOTAL
OPTIONS/SARs GRANTED TO EMPLOYEES IN FISCAL YEAR |
|
EXERCISE
OR BASE PRICE ($/SH) |
|
EXPIRATION
DATE |
|
POTENTIAL
REALIZABLE VALUE AT ASSUMED ANNUAL RATES OF STOCK PRICE APPRECIATION FOR
OPTION TERM (2)
5%
($) 10% ($) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry
D. Leitman |
|
|
-0- |
|
|
-0- |
|
|
-0- |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher
Bentley |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
3.34 |
|
$ |
13.782 |
|
|
3/30/2014 |
|
|
173,283 |
|
|
439,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.
Daniel Brdar |
|
|
35,000 |
|
|
5.84 |
|
$ |
13.782 |
|
|
3/30/2014 |
|
|
303,246 |
|
|
768,592 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph
G. Mahler |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
3.34 |
|
$ |
13.782 |
|
|
3/30/2014 |
|
|
173,283 |
|
|
439,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hansraj
C. Maru |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
1.67 |
|
$ |
13.782 |
|
|
3/30/2014 |
|
|
86,642 |
|
|
219,598 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herbert
T. Nock |
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
2.50 |
|
$ |
13.782 |
|
|
3/30/2014 |
|
|
129,963 |
|
|
329,397 |
|
(1)
The
options were granted under our 1998 Equity Incentive Plan. These options become
exercisable in four equal annual installments on each anniversary date of the
date of grant. Options that have been issued may not be exercised beyond the
earlier of (a) ten years from the date of grant, or (b) three months after the
holder ceases to be employed by us, except in the event of termination by reason
of death or permanent disability, in which event the option may be exercised for
up to one year following termination.
(2)
The
assumed rates are compounded annually for the full term of the
options.
Aggregated
Option Exercises in Last Fiscal Year and Fiscal Year-End Option
Values
NAME |
SHARES
ACQUIRED ON EXERCISE (#) |
VALUE
REALIZED ($) |
NUMBER
OF SECURITIES UNDERLYING UNEXERCISED OPTIONS AT
10/31/04
EXERCISABLE/
UNEXERCISABLE
(#) |
VALUE
OF UNEXERCISED IN-THE-MONEY OPTIONS AT 10/31/04
EXERCISABLE/
UNEXERCISABLE
(1) ($) |
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry
D. Leitman |
160,000 |
2,506,596 |
1,348,000
(2)
100,000
(3) |
13,328,640
(2)
-0-
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher
R. Bentley |
4,900 |
80,262 |
193,000
(2)
58,000
(3) |
1,436,560
(2)
51,600
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
R.
Daniel Brdar |
-0- |
-0- |
89,500
(2)
89,500
(3) |
86,000
(2)
258,000
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph
G. Mahler |
63,150 |
897,216 |
212,800
(2)
58,000
(3) |
1,726,754
(2)
51,600
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hansraj
C. Maru |
-0- |
-0- |
181,500
(2)
40,500
(3) |
1,421,960
(2)
51,600
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
Herbert
T. Nock |
12,500 |
154,200 |
345,000
(2)
77,500
(3) |
-0-
(2)
258,000
(3) |
|
Based
upon the closing price of $12.335 on October 29, 2004 of our common stock
on the Nasdaq National Market minus the respective option exercise
price. |
Employment
Agreements
In
August 1997, we entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Leitman upon
hiring him as our President and Chief Executive Officer. The employment
agreement was subsequently modified in June 2002. Under the agreement, which is
terminable by either party upon 30 days notice, Mr. Leitman is entitled to a
minimum annual salary and a bonus based upon an incentive compensation plan to
be developed by
Mr. Leitman with the compensation committee. In addition, upon entering into the
agreement, we granted Mr. Leitman options to purchase 1,500,000 shares of our
common stock. The agreement also provides Mr. Leitman with the opportunity to
participate in insurance plans and other employment benefits as may be generally
available to other of our employees. In certain circumstances, if Mr. Leitman’s
employment is terminated, including a termination by Mr. Leitman upon a change
of control, Mr. Leitman will be entitled to a severance benefit equal to (i) two
times his then base salary, plus (ii) an amount equal to Mr. Leitman’s bonus
from us for the immediately preceding year. The agreement also contains
non-disclosure provisions and prohibits Mr. Leitman from competing with us
during the term of his employment and for a period of two years thereafter.
Under the agreement, we have agreed to use our best efforts to cause
Mr. Leitman to be elected to our board of directors and to appoint Mr.
Leitman as a member of the executive committee of our board of directors.
In
October 1998, we entered into an employment agreement with Mr. Mahler upon
hiring him as our Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Corporate Secretary.
Under the agreement, which is terminable by either party upon 30 days notice,
Mr. Mahler is entitled to a minimum annual salary and a bonus based upon our
incentive compensation plan.
In addition, upon entering into the agreement, we granted Mr. Mahler options to
purchase 300,000 shares of our common stock. The agreement also provides Mr.
Mahler with the opportunity to participate in insurance plans and other
employment benefits as may be generally available to other of our employees. In
certain circumstances, if Mr. Mahler’s employment is terminated, Mr. Mahler will
be entitled to a severance benefit equal to (i) his then base salary, plus (ii)
an amount equal to Mr. Mahler’s bonus from us for the immediately preceding
year. The agreement also contains non-disclosure provisions and prohibits Mr.
Mahler from competing with us during the term of his employment and for a period
of two years thereafter.
In
February 2005, we entered into an employment arrangement with Mr. Brdar upon his
promotion to Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Under the
at-will agreement, Mr. Brdar is entitled to an annual base salary of $250,000
and a bonus based upon our incentive compensation plan. In addition, we granted
Mr. Brdar options to purchase 250,000 shares of our common stock. If Mr. Brdar’s
employment is terminated in the event of a change of control of us or without
cause, Mr. Brdar will be entitled to a severance benefit equal to one year’s
salary.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Decisions
regarding executive compensation are principally made by the compensation
committee, which is composed of Messrs. Lawson, Casten, Rolls and Petty. No
member of the compensation committee during the fiscal year ended October 31,
2004 was an officer or employee of FuelCell or any of its subsidiaries or was
formerly an officer of FuelCell or any of its subsidiaries. None of our
executive officers during the fiscal year ended October 31, 2004 has served as a
director or member of the compensation committee (or other committee serving an
equivalent function) of any other entity whose executive officers served as a
director of our board of directors or member of our compensation
committee.
Compensation
Committee Report on Executive Compensation
The
compensation committee reviews our compensation plan on a regular basis. The
compensation committee periodically retains independent consultants on an as
needed basis to provide current market data with regard to base salary
structure, short-term cash incentives and with the development of long-term
incentive plans. The compensation committee regularly updates its assessment of
various long-term incentive tools including stock options, restricted stock,
performance-based equity, and other alternatives that might be available.
Our
primary objective in developing executive compensation policies is to attract,
motivate and retain highly qualified and effective leaders. The compensation
policy includes various components of compensation that are intended to align
management behaviors and priorities directly with our strategic objectives and
to encourage management to act in the best long-term interest of us and our
shareholders. Our executive officer compensation policy generally consists of
three elements: base compensation, annual cash bonus and long-term incentive
compensation.
Cash
Compensation
Annual
cash compensation consists of two elements: base salary and annual cash bonus.
Each officer is offered a base salary that is commensurate for the role that he
or she is performing. In setting compensation, the compensation committee
strives to maintain base compensation for our executive officers at levels which
the compensation committee, based on its experience, believes are competitive
with the compensation of comparable executive officers in similarly situated
companies.
Increases
in base salary are based on a periodic review and evaluation of the performance
of the operation or function for which the executive has responsibility, and is
measured against defined performance criteria. The executive is also reviewed
according to his or her competence as an effective leader in FuelCell, which
includes an evaluation of the skills and experience required for the job,
coupled with a comparison of these elements with similar elements for other
executives both within and outside of FuelCell.
Executive
officers are eligible to participate in a bonus plan. The compensation committee
determines awards under the bonus plan. The compensation committee considers
input of our Chief Executive Officer with respect to the bonus to be awarded to
the other executive officers. The executive officers, as well as other key
employees, may receive bonuses based upon meeting the performance objectives of
FuelCell and their contributions to FuelCell.
The
compensation paid by us to our Chief Executive Officer for fiscal
2004
was based upon an employment agreement negotiated with Mr. Leitman. The
compensation committee has recently conducted a survey of compensation packages
of Chief Executive Officers in comparable companies, and believes, based upon
the individual experience of its members, that the compensation package for Mr.
Leitman for fiscal
2004 was reasonable based upon Mr. Leitman’s experience, his level of
responsibility and the contributions made and expected to be made by him to
FuelCell. See
section “Executive Compensation--Employment Agreement” for a description of Mr.
Leitman’s employment agreement.
Long-term
incentive compensation
Each
of the executive officers and all employees are eligible to receive awards under
the 1998 Equity Incentive Plan. The 1998 Equity Incentive Plan will be used to
align a portion of the officers’ compensation with the shareholders' interest
and the long-term success of us by encouraging the executive officers and other
employees to remain with us, and by enabling optionees to develop and maintain a
significant, long-term stock ownership position in our common stock. The value
realizable from exercisable options is dependent upon the extent to which our
performance is reflected in the market price of our common stock at any
particular point in time.
In
determining the number of options to be granted to each executive officer, the
compensation committee considers input of our Chief Executive Officer with
respect to the executive officers, other than our Chief Executive Officer. These
determinations are based upon compensation surveys conducted during fiscal 2001
of executive officers and certain key employees in comparable
companies.
The
members of the compensation committee have submitted this report.
Compensation Committee |
|
William
Lawson (Chairman) |
Thomas
Casten |
John
Rolls |
Performance
Graph
The
following graph compares the annual change in our cumulative total shareholder
return on our common stock for the five fiscal
years ended October 31, 2004 with the cumulative total return on the Russell
2000 and a peer group consisting of SIC Group Code 369 companies listed on The
American Stock Exchange, Nasdaq National Market and New York Stock Exchange for
that period.
COMPANY/INDEX/MARKET |
|
10/31/1999 |
|
10/31/2000 |
|
10/31/2001 |
|
10/31/2002 |
|
10/31/2003 |
|
10/31/2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
895.89 |
|
|
365.79 |
|
|
135.03 |
|
|
357.59 |
|
|
288.67 |
|
Misc
Electric Equip, Supplies |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
114.39 |
|
|
58.25 |
|
|
56.40 |
|
|
86.05 |
|
|
90.45 |
|
Russell
2000 Index |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
115.87 |
|
|
99.68 |
|
|
89.96 |
|
|
122.97 |
|
|
136.48 |
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
MTU-Friedrichshafen
GmbH
MTU-Friedrichshafen
GmbH holds 2,746,548 shares of our common stock. We have certain business
relationships with its subsidiary; MTU CFC Solutions (MTU).
In
December of 1999, we entered into an agreement with Daimler Chrysler affiliate
MTU-Friedrichshafen GmbH granting an exclusive license to use our Direct Fuel
Cell (DFC) patent rights and know how in Europe and the Middle East and a
non-exclusive license in South America and Africa subject to certain rights of
us and others. This license agreement was assigned to MTU in February
2003. MTU has agreed to make any improvements to our DFC available to us.
MTU plans to conduct further research, development, manufacturing and marketing
programs in the area of carbonate fuel cell technology and has agreed to
negotiate a license grant of the results to us. In addition, MTU has
agreed to pay a royalty based on kilowatts of electrical generating capacity
using our DFC made or sold by MTU or its permitted licensees, including a
minimum annual royalty commencing in 2000. Pursuant to this agreement, MTU
paid us $300,000 in royalties in fiscal year 2004.
In
July 1998, we entered into a Cross-Licensing and Cross-Selling Agreement with
MTU-Friedrichshafen GmbH which was also assigned to MTU in February 2003. In
this license MTU and we have granted to each other the right to manufacture and
sell each other's stationary power fuel cell products in their respective
regions. Each company will pay the other royalties based upon sales. Mr. Bode, a
director of FuelCell, is an executive officer of an affiliate of MTU, and MTU is
a significant shareholder of FuelCell. We believe that the terms of our
transactions with MTU are no less favorable to us than it could have obtained
from an unaffiliated third party.
During
fiscal year 2004, we sold to MTU fuel cell components for approximately $1.6
million.
Strategic
Alliance with Enbridge, Inc.
On
November 4, 2003, we entered into a strategic alliance agreement with Enbridge
to distribute our products in Canada. As part of the agreement, Enbridge
received warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of our common stock. The agreement
calls for the warrants to be exercisable on a graduated scale based on order
flow generated by Enbridge. The full quantity of warrants will vest with order
commitments for 20 megawatts of DFC power plants. The exercise prices of the
warrants range from $14.65 to $19.04 per share and the warrants will expire in
November 2006. Enbridge also holds shares of Series 2 Preferred Stock
issued by Global, a subsidiary of FuelCell, which are presently convertible into
225,286 shares of the our common stock. George K. Petty, a member of our
board of directors, is a director of Enbridge.
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN
BENEFICIAL
OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
The
following table sets forth certain information as of March 31, 2005 with respect
to: (a) the only shareholders known to management to own beneficially more than
5% of our outstanding common stock; (b) each of our
directors; (c) each of our
executive officers named in the Summary Compensation Table under the heading
“Executive Compensation--Annual and Long-Term Compensation”;
and (d) in summary, all of our
directors and executive officers as a group. Information in this table with
respect to our common stock includes shares of our common stock issuable upon
the exchange of exchangeable shares.
Unless
indicated otherwise the address of each holder is in care of FuelCell Energy,
Inc., 3 Great Pasture Road, Danbury, Connecticut 06813-1305.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
of |
|
|
|
Percentage
of |
|
|
|
Common
Stock |
|
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
|
owned |
|
|
|
Common |
|
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry
D. Leitman |
|
|
1,420,056 |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
2.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warren
D. Bagatelle |
|
|
1,094,992 |
|
|
(3)
(4 |
) |
|
2.27 |
|
c/o
Loeb Partners Corp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61
Broadway |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
York, NY 10006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher
R. Bentley |
|
|
397,900 |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael
Bode |
|
|
2,746,548 |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
5.70 |
|
c/o
MTU CFC Solutions GmbH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Postfach |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D-81663
München |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.
Daniel Brdar |
|
|
121,399 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas
R. Casten |
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
* |
|
c/o
Primary Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200
York Road |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suite
129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oak
Brook, IL 60523 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James
D. Gerson |
|
|
1,342,796 |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas
L. Kempner |
|
|
507,192 |
|
|
(3)
(10 |
) |
|
1.05 |
|
c/o
Loeb Partners Corp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61
Broadway |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
York, NY 10006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William
A. Lawson |
|
|
91,000 |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph
G. Mahler |
|
|
282,806 |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hansraj
C. Maru |
|
|
233,353 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles
J. Murphy |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
* |
|
c/o
Credit Suisse First Boston |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
Madison Avenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19th
Floor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New
York, NY 10010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Herbert
T. Nock |
|
|
373,750 |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George
K. Petty |
|
|
235,286 |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
of |
|
|
|
Percentage
of |
|
|
|
Common
Stock |
|
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
|
owned |
|
|
|
Common |
|
Name |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John
A. Rolls |
|
|
48,000 |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
* |
|
c/o
Thermion Systems International |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
611
Access Road |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stratford,
CT 06615 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daimler
Benz affiliate |
|
|
2,746,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.70 |
|
MTU
Friedrichshafen GmbH (“MTU”) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybachplatz
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88045
Friedrichshafen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wellington
Management Company, LLP |
|
|
6,647,200 |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
13.79 |
|
75
State Street |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boston,
MA 02109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All
Directors and Executive Officers as a Group |
|
|
5,717,338 |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
11.18 |
|
(15
persons) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
Less than one percent.
(1) |
Unless otherwise
noted, each person identified possesses sole voting and investment power
with respect to the shares listed. |
(2) |
Mr. Leitman’s shareholdings include options to purchase
1,398,000 shares of our common stock, which are currently exercisable or
are exercisable within 60 days. |
(3) |
Warren
Bagatelle and Thomas L. Kempner, by virtue of being general partners of
Loeb Investors Co. LXXV, may each be deemed to beneficially own 491,192
shares of stock owned by Loeb Investors Co.
LXXV. |
(4) |
Mr.
Bagatelle’s shareholdings include options to purchase 16,000 shares of our
common stock, which
are currently exercisable
and 491,192 shares of stock owned by Loeb Investors Co.
LXXV. |
(5) |
Mr.
Bentley’s shareholdings include options to purchase 219,750 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60
days. Mr. Bentley’s shareholdings include 100 shares held by his wife,
Karen Bentley. Mr. Bentley disclaims beneficial ownership of the
securities held by his wife. |
(6) |
Mr.
Bode is an executive officer of MTU CFC Solutions GmbH, a company of
Daimler Chrysler, AG.
MTU-Friedrichshafen
GmbH holds 2,746,548 shares of our common
stock. |
(7) |
Mr.
Brdar’s shareholdings include options to purchase 119,250 shares of common
stock, which are currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60
days. |
(8) |
Mr.
Casten’s shareholdings include options to purchase 40,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable.
|
(9) |
Mr.
Gerson’s shareholdings include 113,200 shares held by his wife, Barbara
Gerson, as custodian for one child and 241,800 shares held by a private
foundation, of which Mr. Gerson is President and a director.
Mr. Gerson disclaims beneficial ownership of the securities held by
his wife and by the private foundation. Mr. Gerson’s shareholdings include
options to purchase 16,000 shares of our common stock, which are currently
exercisable. |
(10) |
Mr.
Kempner’s shareholdings include options to purchase 16,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable
and 491,192 shares of stock owned by Loeb Investors Co.
LXXV. |
(11) |
Mr.
Lawson’s shareholdings include options to purchase 16,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently
exercisable. |
(12) |
Mr.
Mahler’s shareholdings include options to purchase 239,550 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60
days. |
(13) |
Dr.
Maru’s shareholdings include options to purchase 202,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60
days. |
(14) |
Mr.
Murphy’s shareholdings include options to purchase 20,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently
exercisable. |
(15) |
Mr.
Nock’s shareholdings include options to purchase 373,750 shares of our
common stock, which are currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60
days. |
(16) |
Mr.
Petty, by virtue of being a director of Enbridge, may be deemed to
beneficially own 225,286
shares of our common stock, which are issuable upon conversion of the
Global Preferred Stock held by Enbridge. Mr. Petty is a director of
Enbridge. Mr. Petty disclaims beneficial interest of these shares. Mr.
Petty’s shareholdings include options to purchase 10,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently
exercisable. |
(17) |
Mr.
Roll’s shareholdings include options to purchase 40,000 shares of our
common stock, which are currently
exercisable. |
(18) |
Based
upon information contained in Schedule 13G/A filed on February 5, 2005.
|
(19) |
Includes
options to purchase 2,726,300 shares of our common stock, which are
currently exercisable or are exercisable within 60 days and 225,286 shares
of our common stock issuable upon conversion of the FuelCell Energy, Ltd.
Series 1 preferred shares. |
EQUITY
COMPENSATION PLAN AND WARRANT INFORMATION (1)
Plan
Category |
|
Number
of Common Shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options,
warrants and rights |
|
Weighted-average
exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and
rights |
|
Number
of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity
compensation plans |
|
Plans
approved by security holders: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
option plans |
|
|
5,353,791 |
|
$ |
10.63 |
|
|
1,641,048 |
|
Employee
stock purchase plan (2) |
|
|
15,593 |
|
$ |
10.49 |
|
|
431,738 |
|
Warrants
issued to business partners not approved by security holders (3)
|
|
|
1,640,000 |
|
$ |
35.51 |
|
|
- |
|
Total |
|
|
7,009,384 |
|
$ |
16.45 |
|
|
2,072,786 |
|
(1)
As of the end of our fiscal year ended October 31, 2004.
(2)
We offer a stock purchase plan that allows employees to purchase shares of our
common stock at a discounted cost.
(3)
We have issued warrants to certain of our business partners as sales incentives.
LIMITATION
ON LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION MATTERS
Our
certificate of incorporation contains provisions that limit the liability of our
directors for monetary damages to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.
Consequently, our directors will not be personally liable to us or our
shareholders for monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duties as
directors, except liability for the following:
· |
Any
breach of their duty of loyalty to us or our
shareholders; |
· |
Acts
or omissions not in good faith or which involve intentional misconduct or
a knowing violation of law; |
· |
Unlawful
payments of dividends or unlawful stock repurchases or redemptions as
provided in Section 174 of the Delaware General Corporation Law;
or |
· |
Any
transaction from which the director derived an improper personal
benefit. |
Our
bylaws provide for the indemnification of our directors and officers to the
fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. We believe that these bylaw provisions
are necessary to attract and retain qualified persons as directors and officers.
We also maintain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.
The
limitation of liability and indemnification provisions in our certificate of
incorporation and bylaws may discourage shareholders from bringing a lawsuit
against our directors for breach of their fiduciary duty. They may also reduce
the likelihood of derivative litigation against our directors and officers, even
though an action, if successful, might benefit us and other shareholders.
Furthermore, a shareholder’s investment may be adversely affected to the extent
that we pay the costs of settlement and damage awards against directors and
officers as required by these indemnification provisions. At present, there is
no pending litigation or proceeding involving any of our directors and officers
regarding which indemnification is sought, and we are not aware of any
threatened litigation that may result in claims for indemnification.
Insofar
as the provisions of our certificate of incorporation or bylaws provide for
indemnification of directors or officers for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, we have been informed that in the opinion of
the Securities and Exchange Commission this indemnification is against public
policy as expressed in the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and is therefore
unenforceable.
DESCRIPTION
OF CAPITAL STOCK
General
The
following is a summary of the rights of our common stock and preferred stock and
related provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws. For more
detailed information, please see our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, as
amended.
Authorized
and Outstanding Capital Stock
Our
authorized capital stock consists of 150,000,000 shares of common stock, par
value $.0001 per share, and 250,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $.01
per share, issuable in one or more series designated by our board of directors,
of which 135,000 shares of our preferred stock have been designated as 5% Series
B Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock. On March 31, 2005,
48,193,986 shares of our common stock were issued and outstanding and 105,875
shares of our Series B preferred stock were issued and outstanding. No other
shares of our preferred stock are issued and outstanding.
In
addition, as of March 31, 2005, there were outstanding options to purchase
5,493,659 shares of our common stock under our stock options plans, 1,021,318
shares of our common stock were available for future issuance under our stock
option plans, 416,145 shares of our common stock were available for future
issuance under our employee stock purchase plan, and there were outstanding
warrants to purchase 1,500,000 shares of our common stock. In addition, as of
November 3, 2004, we were obligated to issue approximately 225,286 shares of our
common stock upon conversion of the Series 1 preferred shares. At March 31,
2005, there were 823 holders of record of our common stock.
Common
Stock
Voting
Rights
The
holders of our common stock have one vote per share. Holders of our common stock
are not entitled to vote cumulatively for the election of directors. Generally,
all matters to be voted on by shareholders must be approved by a majority, or,
in the case of the election of directors, by a plurality, of the votes entitled
to be cast at a meeting at which a quorum is present by all shares of our common
stock present in person or represented by proxy, voting together as a single
class, subject to any voting rights granted to holders of any then outstanding
preferred stock.
Dividends
Holders
of our common stock will share ratably in any dividends declared by the board of
directors, subject to the preferential rights of any of our preferred stock then
outstanding. Dividends consisting of shares of our common stock may be paid to
holders of shares of our common stock.
Other
Rights
In
the event of our liquidation, dissolution or winding up, after payment of
liabilities and liquidation preferences on any of our preferred stock then
outstanding, the holders of shares of our common stock are entitled to share
ratably in all assets available for distribution. Holders of shares of our
common stock have no preemptive rights or rights to convert their shares of our
common stock into any other securities. There are no redemption or sinking fund
provisions applicable to the common stock.
Preferred
Stock
Under
our certificate of incorporation, our board of directors has the authority,
without further shareholder action, to issue from time to time, preferred stock
in one or more series and for such consideration as may be fixed from time to
time by our board of directors. Our board also has the authority to fix and
determine, in the manner provided by law, the relative rights and preferences of
the shares of any series so established, such as dividend and voting rights. Our
certificate of incorporation authorizes 250,000 shares of preferred stock. Prior
to the issuance of each series of preferred stock, our board will adopt
resolutions creating and designating the series as a series of preferred stock.
The board of directors may, without shareholder approval, issue preferred stock
with voting and other rights that could adversely affect the voting power and
other rights of the holders of our common stock and could have anti-takeover
effects.
Series
1 Preferred Shares and Exchangeable Shares
On
August 4, 2003, we entered into a combination agreement with Global
Thermoelectric Inc. to combine Global with us in a share-for-share exchange
pursuant to a Plan of Arrangement subject to approval by the Court of Queen’s
Bench of Alberta, Canada. On October 31, 2003, our shareholders and the
shareholders of Global approved the combination. On October 31, 2003, the Court
of Queen’s Bench of Alberta issued an order approving the combination. On
November 3, 2003, the combination transaction was consummated. In the aggregate,
we issued approximately 8.2 million shares of our common stock and exchangeable
shares in the acquisition. Following our acquisition of Global, Global’s Series
2 preferred shares remained outstanding in Global. At the time of the sale of
our TEG business, the holder of the Series 2 preferred shares exchanged them for
Series 1 Class A cumulative redeemable exchangeable preferred shares (which were
referred to as the Series 1 preferred shares) issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd.,
one of our indirect, wholly-owned subsidiaries. We have guaranteed the
obligations of FuelCell Energy, Ltd. under the Series 1 preferred
shares.
Series
1 Preferred Shares
The
Series 1 preferred shares may be converted into shares of our common stock at
the following “conversion prices”:
• Cdn.$110.97
per share of our common stock until July 31, 2005;
• Cdn.$120.22
per share of our common stock after July 31, 2005 until July 31,
2010;
• Cdn.$129.46
per share of our common stock after July 31, 2010 until July 31,
2015;
• Cdn.$138.71
per share of our common stock after July 31, 2015 until July 31, 2020;
and
• at
any time after July 31, 2020, the price equal to 95% of the then current market
price (converted to Cdn.$ at the time of such calculation) of shares of our
common stock at the time of conversion.
The
foregoing “conversion prices” are subject to adjustment for certain subsequent
events. As illustrated below, the number of shares of our common stock issuable
upon conversion of the Series 1 preferred shares after July 31, 2020 may be
significantly greater than the number of shares issuable prior to that
time.
The
following examples illustrate the number of shares of our common stock that we
will be required to issue to the holder(s) of the Series 1 preferred shares if
and when the holder(s) exercise their conversion rights pursuant to the terms of
the Series 1 preferred shares. The following examples are based upon
Cdn.$25,000,000 of Series 1 preferred shares outstanding (which is the amount
currently outstanding) and assume that all accrued dividends on the Series 1
preferred shares have been paid through the time of the conversion and, in the
case of conversions occurring after July 31, 2020, that the exchange rate for
Canadian dollars is Cdn.$1.3104 to U.S.$1.00 at the time of the
conversion:
• if
the Series 1 preferred shares convert prior to July 31, 2005, we would be
required to issue approximately 225,286 shares of our common stock;
• if
the Series 1 preferred shares convert after July 31, 2005, but prior to July 31,
2010, we would be required to issue approximately 207,952 shares of our common
stock;
• if
the Series 1 preferred shares convert after July 31, 2010, but prior to July 31,
2015, we would be required to issue approximately 193,110 shares of our common
stock;
• if
the Series 1 preferred shares convert after July 31, 2015, but prior to July 31,
2020, we would be required to issue approximately 180,232 shares of our common
stock; and
• if
the Series 1 preferred shares convert any time after July 31, 2020, assuming our
common stock price is U.S.$14.62 at the time of conversion, we would be required
to issue approximately 1,373,615 shares of our common stock.
Subject
to the Business Corporations Act (Alberta), the holder of the Series 1 preferred
shares is not entitled to receive notice of or to attend or vote at any meeting
of the FuelCell Energy, Ltd. common shareholders. At present, we own all of the
FuelCell Energy, Ltd. common stock.
Quarterly
dividends of Cdn.$312,500 accrue on the Series 1 preferred shares (subject to
possible reduction pursuant to the terms of the Series 1 preferred shares on
account of increases in the price of our common stock). We have agreed to pay a
minimum of Cdn.$500,000 in cash or common stock annually to Enbridge, the sole
current holder of the Series 1 preferred shares, as long as Enbridge holds the
shares. Interest accrues on cumulative unpaid dividends at a 2.45% quarterly
rate, compounded quarterly, until payment thereof. All cumulative unpaid
dividends must be paid by December 31, 2010. From 2010 through 2020, we would be
required to pay annual dividend amounts totaling Cdn.$1.25 million. Cumulative
unpaid dividends of $2.8 million on the Series 1 preferred shares were
outstanding as of October 31, 2004. We have guaranteed the dividend obligations
of FuelCell Energy, Ltd. under the Series 1 preferred shares.
Subject
to the Business Corporations Act (Alberta), we may redeem the Series 1 preferred
shares, in whole or part, at any time, if on the day that the notice of
redemption is first given, the volume-weighted average price at which our common
stock is traded on the applicable stock exchange during the 20 consecutive
trading days ending on a date not earlier than the fifth preceding day on which
the notice of redemption is given was not less than a 20% premium to the current
conversion price on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Series 1 Preferred Share to be
redeemed, together with an amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends to
the date fixed for redemption. On or after July 31, 2010, the Series 1 preferred
shares are redeemable by us at any time on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Series 1
Preferred Share to be redeemed together with an amount equal to all accrued and
unpaid dividends to the date fixed for redemption. There are currently 1,000,000
Series 1 preferred shares outstanding.
In
the event of the liquidation, dissolution or winding up of FuelCell Energy,
Ltd., whether voluntary or involuntary, or any other distribution of its assets
among its shareholders for the purpose of winding up its affairs, the holder of
the Series 1 preferred shares will be entitled to receive the amount paid on
such Series 1 preferred shares (currently Cdn.$25,000,000) together with an
amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends thereon, before any amount will
be paid or any of FuelCell Energy, Ltd.’s property or assets will be distributed
to the holders of FuelCell Energy, Ltd.’s common stock. After payment to the
holder of the Series 1 preferred shares of the amounts so payable to them, the
holder of the Series 1 preferred shares will not be entitled to share in any
other distribution of FuelCell Energy, Ltd.’s property or assets. We have
guaranteed the liquidation obligations of FuelCell Energy, Ltd. under the Series
1 preferred shares.
On
October 29, 2004, we redeemed all of the then issued and outstanding
exchangeable shares issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The exchangeable shares were
redeemed in exchange for shares of our common stock on a one-for-one basis. The
redemption had no impact on the total number of shares of our common stock
deemed outstanding.
The
exchangeable shares were structured to be the economic equivalent of our common
stock, and were issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. (formerly FCE Canada Inc.). We
indirectly own all of the outstanding voting shares of FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The
exchangeable shares were issued in the combination to generally enable Canadian
Global common shareholders to defer recognition of gain or loss on their Global
common shares for Canadian federal income tax purposes for as long as they held
exchangeable shares.
Series
B Preferred Stock
On
November 11, 2004, we
entered into a purchase
agreement
with Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams
Harkness, Inc., and Lazard Freres & Co., LLC (collectively referred to as
the “Initial Purchasers”) for the private placement under Rule 144A of up to
135,000 shares of our
5%
Series B Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (Liquidation
Preference $1,000).
On November 17, 2004, we closed on the sale of 100,000 shares of Series B
preferred stock to the Initial Purchasers. Under the terms of the purchase
agreement, the Initial Purchasers were granted an over-allotment option to
purchase up to an additional 35,000 shares of Series B preferred stock through
January 25, 2005.
On
January 14, 2005, we sold an additional 5,875 shares of our Series B preferred
stock to the Initial Purchasers as part of the over-allotment option.
Net
proceeds to us were approximately $99 million.
The
following is a summary of certain provisions of our Series B preferred stock.
The shares of our Series B preferred stock and the shares of our common stock
issuable upon conversion of the shares of our Series B preferred stock
are
covered by a registration rights agreement.
Ranking
Shares
of our Series B preferred stock rank with respect to dividend rights and rights
upon our liquidation, winding up or dissolution:
· |
senior
to shares of our common stock; |
· |
junior
to our debt obligations; and |
· |
effectively
junior to our subsidiaries' (i) existing and future liabilities and (ii)
capital stock held by others. |
Dividends
The
Series B preferred stock pays cumulative annual dividends of $50 per share which
are payable quarterly in arrears on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November
15, commencing February 15, 2005, when, as and if declared by the board of
directors. Dividends will be paid on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of
twelve 30-day months. Dividends on the shares of our Series B preferred stock
will accumulate and be cumulative from the date of original issuance.
Accumulated dividends on the shares of our Series B preferred stock will not
bear any interest.
The
dividend rate on the Series B preferred stock is subject to upward adjustment as
set forth in the certificate of designation, as amended, of the Series B
preferred stock if we fail to pay, or to set apart funds to pay, dividends on
the shares of our Series B preferred stock for any quarterly dividend period.
The dividend rate on the Series B preferred stock is also subject to upward
adjustment as set forth in the registration rights agreement entered into with
the Initial Purchasers if we fail to satisfy our registration obligations with
respect to the Series B preferred shares (or the underlying common shares) set
forth in the registration rights agreement.
No
dividends or other distributions may be paid or set apart for payment upon our
common shares (other than a dividend payable solely in shares of a like or
junior ranking) unless all accumulated and unpaid dividends have been paid or
funds or shares of common stock therefor have been set apart on our Series B
preferred stock.
We
may pay dividends on the Series B preferred stock:
· |
at
the option of the holder, in shares of our common stock which will be
registered pursuant to a registration statement to allow for the immediate
sale of these common shares in the public market;
or |
· |
any
combination thereof. |
Liquidation
The
Series B preferred stock has a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Upon
any voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding up of our
company resulting in a distribution of assets to the holders of any class or
series of our capital stock, each holder of shares of our Series B preferred
stock will be entitled to payment out of our assets available for distribution
of an amount equal to the liquidation preference per share of Series B preferred
stock held by that holder, plus all accumulated and unpaid dividends on those
shares to the date of that liquidation, dissolution, or winding up, before any
distribution is made on any junior shares, including shares of our common stock,
but after any distributions on any of our indebtedness or senior shares (if
any). After payment in full of the liquidation preference and all accumulated
and unpaid dividends to which holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock
are entitled, holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock will not be
entitled to any further participation in any distribution of our assets.
Conversion
A
share of our Series B preferred stock may be converted at any time, at the
option of the holder, into 85.1064 shares of our common stock (which is
equivalent to an initial conversion price of $11.75 per share) plus cash in lieu
of fractional shares. The conversion rate is subject to adjustment upon the
occurrence of certain events, as described below, but will not be adjusted for
accumulated and unpaid dividends. Upon conversion, holders of Series B preferred
stock will not receive a cash payment for any accumulated dividends. Instead
accumulated dividends, if any, will be cancelled.
On
or after November 20, 2009 we may, at our option, cause shares of our Series B
preferred stock to be automatically converted into that number of shares of our
common stock that are issuable at the then prevailing conversion rate. We may
exercise our conversion right only if the closing price of our common stock
exceeds 150% of the then prevailing conversion price for 20 trading days during
any consecutive 30 trading day period, as described in the certificate of
designation, as amended, for the Series B preferred stock.
If
there is a fundamental change in the ownership or control of FuelCell (as
described in the certificate of designation, as amended), holders of our Series
B preferred stock may require us to purchase all or part of their shares at a
redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation preference of the shares of
our Series B preferred stock to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid
dividends, if any, in the manner set forth in the certificate of designation, as
amended.
If
holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock elect to convert their shares
in connection with certain fundamental changes (as described in the certificate
of designation, as amended), we will in certain circumstances increase the
conversion rate by a number of additional shares of common stock upon conversion
or, in lieu thereof, we may in certain circumstances elect to adjust the
conversion rate and related conversion obligation so that shares of our Series B
preferred stock are converted into shares of the acquiring or surviving company,
in each case as described in the certificate of designation, as
amended.
The
conversion price of the Series B preferred stock is subject to adjustment in
certain circumstances as set forth in the certificate of designation, as
amended, to prevent dilution of the interests of the holders of the Series B
preferred shares, including on account of the following:
· |
issuances
of common stock as a dividend or distribution to holders of our common
stock; |
· |
common
stock share splits or share combinations; |
· |
issuances
to holders of our common stock of any rights, warrants or options to
purchase our common stock for a period of less than 60 days; and
|
· |
distributions
of assets, evidences of indebtedness or other property to holders of our
common stock. |
Voting
Holders
of shares of our Series B preferred stock have no voting rights unless (1)
dividends on any shares of our Series B preferred stock or any other class or
series of stock ranking on a parity with the shares of our Series B preferred
stock with respect to the payment of dividends shall be in arrears for dividend
periods, whether or not consecutive, containing in the aggregate a number of
days equivalent to six calendar quarters or (2) we fail to pay the repurchase
price, plus accrued and unpaid dividends, if any, on the fundamental change
repurchase date for shares of our Series B preferred stock following a
fundamental change (as described in the certificate of designation, as amended,
for the Series B preferred stock). In each such case, the holders of shares of
our Series B preferred stock (voting separately as a class with all other series
of other preferred stock on parity with our Series B preferred stock upon which
like voting rights have been conferred and are exercisable, if any) will be
entitled to vote for the election of two directors in addition to those
directors on the board of directors at such time at the next annual meeting of
shareholders and each subsequent meeting until the repurchase price or all
dividends accumulated on the shares of our Series B preferred stock have been
fully paid or set aside for payment. The term of office of all directors elected
by the holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock will terminate
immediately upon the termination of the right of holders of shares of our Series
B preferred stock to vote for directors.
So
long as any shares of our Series B preferred stock remain outstanding, we will
not, without the consent of the holders of at least two-thirds of the shares of
our Series B preferred stock outstanding at the time (voting separately as a
class with all other series of preferred stock, if any, on parity with our
Series B preferred stock upon which like voting rights have been conferred and
are exercisable) issue or increase the authorized amount of any class or series
of shares ranking senior to the outstanding shares of our Series B preferred
stock as to dividends or upon liquidation. In addition, we will not, subject to
certain conditions, amend, alter or repeal provisions of our certificate of
incorporation, including the certificate of designation, as amended, relating to
our Series B preferred stock, whether by merger, consolidation or otherwise, so
as to adversely amend, alter or affect any power, preference or special right of
the outstanding shares of our Series B preferred stock or the holders thereof
without the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the issued and
outstanding shares of our Series B preferred stock.
Anti-Takeover
Provisions
Provisions
of our Certificate of Incorporation and By-Laws
A
number of provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws concern
matters of corporate governance and the rights of shareholders. Some of these
provisions, including, but not limited to, the inability of shareholders to take
action by unanimous written consent, supermajority voting provisions with
respect to any amendment of voting rights provisions, the filling of vacancies
on the board of directors by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining
directors, and the ability of the board of directors to issue shares of
preferred stock and to set the voting rights, preferences and other terms
thereof, without further shareholder action, may be deemed to have anti-takeover
effect and may discourage takeover attempts not first approved by the board of
directors, including takeovers which shareholders may deem to be in their best
interests. If takeover attempts are discouraged, temporary fluctuations in the
market price of shares of our common stock, which may result from actual or
rumored takeover attempts, may be inhibited. These provisions, together with the
ability of the board of directors to issue preferred stock without further
shareholder action, could also delay or frustrate the removal of incumbent
directors or the assumption of control by shareholders, even if the removal or
assumption would be beneficial to our shareholders. These provisions could also
discourage or inhibit a merger, tender offer or proxy contest, even if favorable
to the interests of shareholders, and could depress the market price of our
common stock. The board of directors believes these provisions are appropriate
to protect our interests and the interests of our shareholders. The board of
directors has no present plans to adopt any further measures or devices which
may be deemed to have an “anti-takeover effect.”
Delaware
Anti-Takeover Provisions
We
are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which
prohibits a publicly-held Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business
combination,” except under certain circumstances, with an “interested
shareholder” for a period of three years following the date such person became
an “interested shareholder” unless:
• before
such person became an interested shareholder, the board of directors of the
corporation approved either the business combination or the transaction that
resulted in the interested shareholder becoming an interested
shareholder;
• upon
the consummation of the transaction that resulted in the interested shareholder
becoming an interested shareholder, the interested shareholder owned at least 85
percent of the voting stock of the corporation outstanding at the time the
transaction commenced, excluding shares held by directors who are also officers
of the corporation and shares held by employee stock plans; or
• at
or following the time such person became an interested shareholder, the business
combination is approved by the board of directors of the corporation and
authorized at a meeting of shareholders by the affirmative vote of the holders
of 66 2/3 percent of the outstanding voting stock of the corporation which is
not owned by the interested shareholder.
The
term “interested shareholder” generally is defined as a person who, together
with affiliates and associates, owns, or, within the three years prior to the
determination of interested shareholder status, owned, 15 percent or more of a
corporation’s outstanding voting stock. The term “business combination” includes
mergers, asset or stock sales and other similar transactions resulting in a
financial benefit to an interested shareholder. Section 203 makes it more
difficult for an “interested shareholder” to effect various business
combinations with a corporation for a three-year period. The existence of this
provision would be expected to have an anti-takeover effect with respect to
transactions not approved in advance by the board of directors, including
discouraging attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for
the shares of our common stock held by shareholders. A Delaware corporation may
“opt out” of Section 203 with an express provision in its original certificate
of incorporation or any amendment thereto. Our certificate of incorporation does
not contain any such exclusion.
Connecticut
Anti-Takeover Provisions
The
laws of the State of Connecticut, where our principal executive offices are
located, impose restrictions on certain transactions between certain foreign
corporations and significant shareholders. Section 33-840 of the Connecticut
Business Corporation Act prohibits certain publicly-held foreign corporations
that are based in Connecticut from engaging in a “business combination”
(including the issuance of equity securities which have an aggregate market
value of 5 percent or more of the total market value of the outstanding shares
of the company) with an “interested shareholder” as defined in the Connecticut
Business Corporation Act for a period of five years from the date of the
shareholder’s purchase of stock, unless approved in a prescribed manner. The
application of this statute could prevent a change of control. Generally,
approval is required by the board of directors, by 80 percent of the outstanding
voting shares and two-thirds of the voting power of the outstanding shares of
the voting stock other than shares held by the interested shareholder. We can
give no assurance that these provisions would not prevent us from entering into
a business combination that otherwise would be beneficial to us or to our
shareholders.
Transfer
Agent and Registrar
The
transfer agent and registrar for our common stock and preferred stock is
Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, New York, New York.
SELLING
SHAREHOLDERS
In
the event a holder of our Series B preferred stock elects to receive shares in
lieu of cash as payment of dividends on our Series B preferred stock, the shares
received by the holder (referred to herein as a “selling shareholder”) may be
offered and sold from time to time by the selling shareholder under this
prospectus. The name of each selling shareholder and the number of shares of
common stock beneficially owned by each selling shareholder that may be offered
from time to time under this prospectus will be set forth under this heading in
this prospectus. As of the date of this prospectus, no holder of our Series B
preferred stock has elected to receive shares in lieu of cash. This prospectus
will be supplemented or amended to set forth the name and other information
about each selling shareholder intending to sell these shares. The prospectus
supplement or post-effective amendment will also disclose whether any selling
shareholder selling in connection with such prospectus supplement or
post-effective amendment has held any position or office with, been employed by
or otherwise has had a material relationship with, us or any of our affiliates
during the three years prior to the date of the prospectus supplement or
post-effective amendment.
PLAN
OF DISTRIBUTION
Bonus
Shares
Up
to 300,000 shares of our common stock have been registered on a registration
statement on Form S-1 for which this prospectus forms a part, and will be issued
to certain of our employees as partial payment for annual bonuses earned with
respect to our performance targets for our fiscal year ended October 31, 2004
and future periods.
Dividend
Shares
Background
On
November 11, 2004, we entered into a Purchase Agreement with Citigroup Global
Markets, Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc. and Lazard
Feres & Co., LLC (collectively, the “Initial Purchasers”) for the private
placement under Rule 144A of up to 135,000 shares of 5% Series B Cumulative
Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (liquidation preference $1,000). On
November 17, 2004, we completed a $100 million offering of 100,000 shares of our
Series B preferred stock. Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the Initial
Purchasers were granted an over-allotment option to purchase up to an additional
35,000 shares of Series B preferred stock through January 25, 2005.
On
January 14, 2005, we sold an additional 5,875 shares of our Series B preferred
stock to the Initial Purchasers as part of the over-allotment option.
Holders
of our Series B preferred stock are entitled to receive, when, as and if
declared by our board of directors, out of funds legally available for payment,
cumulative dividends on each share of Series B preferred stock at an annual rate
of 5 percent of the liquidation preference per share, which is equivalent to $50
per share annually. Dividends are payable quarterly in arrears on February 15,
May 15, August 15 and November 15, commencing on February 15, 2005 (or if any
such day is not a business day, on the next succeeding business day), and will
be paid on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of twelve 30-day months.
Accumulated but unpaid dividends will not bear interest. See section entitled
“Description of Capital Stock - Series B Preferred Stock” for a description of
our Series B preferred stock.
A
holder of our Series B preferred stock may elect to receive shares of our common
stock in lieu of cash by delivering a written notice to us at least 30 days
prior to the applicable dividend payment date. Shares received in lieu of cash
may be offered and sold from time to time by the holder of these
shares.
Sale
of Common Shares
We
have paid our first quarterly (February 15, 2005) dividend in cash to holders of
our Series B Preferred Stock. We have registered up to 1,500,000 shares of our
common stock on a registration statement on Form S-1, for which this prospectus
forms a part, to allow for our prompt offering of these shares and the immediate
sale of these shares in the public market from time to time when dividends
become payable. With a reasonable time prior to the applicable dividend payment
date, we intend to sell a number of shares of our common stock in an amount
equal to the cash dividends payable.
The
distribution of these 1,500,000 shares of our common stock is not subject to any
underwriting agreement. We will promptly offer, and sell from time to time, up
to 1,500,000 shares of our common stock. The offering price of these shares will
range between $9.50 and $11.50 per share. We may sell these shares through
customary brokerage channels, either through broker-dealers acting as agents or
brokers, or through broker-dealers acting as principals, who may then resell the
shares, or at private sale or otherwise, at fixed prices, at market prices
prevailing at the time of sale, at varying prices determined at the time of sale
or at negotiated prices. Such sales may be effected in one or more transactions
(which may involve block transactions):
|
• |
on
any national securities exchange or quotation service on which the shares
of our common stock may be listed or quoted at the time of
sale; |
|
• |
in the over-the-counter market; |
|
• |
in
transactions otherwise than on exchanges or services or in the
over-the-counter market; or |
|
• |
through the writing of options. |
We
may effect such transactions by selling the shares to or through broker-dealers,
and such broker-dealers may receive compensation in the form of underwriting
discounts, concessions, commissions, or fees from us and/or purchasers of the
shares for whom such broker-dealers may act as agent or to whom they sell as
principal, or both (which compensation to a particular broker-dealer might be in
excess of customary commissions).
We
may enter into hedging transactions with broker-dealers in connection with
distributions of the shares or otherwise. In these transactions, broker-dealers
may engage in short sales of the shares in the course of hedging the positions
they assume with us. We may also sell shares short and redeliver the shares to
close out such short positions. We may enter into options or other transactions
with broker-dealers that require the delivery to the broker-dealer of the
shares. The broker-dealer may then resell or otherwise transfer such shares
pursuant to this prospectus. We may also loan or pledge the shares to a
broker-dealer. The broker-dealer may sell the shares so loaned, or upon default,
the broker-dealer may sell the pledged shares pursuant to this
prospectus.
Any
broker-dealers that participate with us in the distribution of the 1,500,000
shares being offered pursuant to this prospectus may be deemed to be
underwriters and any commissions received by them and any profit on the resale
of shares positioned by them might be deemed to be underwriting discounts and
commissions within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended
(“Securities Act”), in connection with such sales. If we enter into an agreement
with a broker-dealer or underwriter for the sale of shares covered by this
prospectus, we will file a prospectus supplement or post-effective amendment to
the registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission. This
supplement or amendment will include the following information:
· |
the
name of the participating broker-dealer(s) or
underwriters; |
· |
the
number of shares involved; |
· |
the
price(s) at which the shares were sold; |
· |
the
commissions paid or discounts or concessions allowed by the selling
stockbrokers to the broker-dealers or underwriters, if any;
and |
· |
other
information material to the transaction. |
We
may indemnify any broker-dealer that participates in transactions involving the
sale of the shares against certain liabilities, including liabilities arising
under the Securities Act.
In
order to comply with the securities laws of certain states, if applicable, our
common stock will be sold in such jurisdictions only through registered or
licensed brokers or dealers. In addition, in certain states, our common stock
may not be sold unless the shares have been registered or qualified for sale in
the applicable state or an exemption from the registration or qualification
requirement is available and is complied with. We will bear all fees and
expenses, including selling expenses, commissions and discounts, in connection
with the registration and sale by us of the shares of our common stock covered
by this prospectus.
Our
common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market under the symbol “FCEL”.
Common
Shares in Lieu of Cash and Resale of Common Shares
A
holder of our Series B preferred stock may alternatively elect to receive as
payment of dividends shares of our common stock in lieu of the proceeds received
from the sale of shares of our common stock. In the event we receive notice from
a holder of our Series B preferred stock, within 30 days from the applicable
payment dividend date, electing to receive shares of our common stock in lieu of
cash, we will deliver to or for the account of the holder on the applicable
dividend payment date, shares of our common stock having a value equal to the
cash dividends otherwise payable to such holder based on the average of the
closing sale price per share of our common stock (or, if no closing sale price
is reported, the average of the closing bid and ask prices) on the Nasdaq
National Market (or such other national securities exchange or automated
quotation system on which the shares of our common stock are then listed or
authorized for quotation, or if not so listed or authorized for quotation, an
amount determined in good faith by our board of directors to be the fair value
of the shares of our common stock), over the five trading day period ending on
the third business day prior to the applicable dividend payment date.
The
issuance of these shares will be made pursuant to an exemption from registration
provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.
In
lieu of issuing fractional shares of our common stock, we will pay a cash
adjustment in respect of any fractional interest in an amount equal to the
fractional interest multiplied by the last reported closing sale price per share
of our common stock (or, if no closing sale price is reported, the average of
the closing bid and ask prices) on the Nasdaq National Market (or such other
national securities exchange or automated quotation system on which the shares
of our common stock are then listed or authorized for quotation, or if not so
listed or authorized for quotation, an amount determined in good faith by our
board of directors to be the fair value of the shares of our common stock), on
the trading day preceding the date shares of our common stock are issued to pay
dividends.
Holders
of our Series B preferred stock who elect to receive shares in lieu of cash as
dividend payments are referred to as the “selling shareholders” in this
prospectus. The shares issued by us to the selling shareholders may be sold by
the selling shareholders or by pledgees, donees, transferees or other successors
in interest of the selling shareholders for their respective own
accounts.
We
will not receive any portion of the proceeds from the sale of the shares being
offered and sold by the selling shareholders. We will bear all of the expenses
in connection with the registration of these shares, but all charges and
expenses incurred in the sale of these shares (including brokerage commissions)
will be borne by the selling shareholders.
The
distribution of the shares by the selling shareholders is not subject to any
underwriting agreement. The shares offered by the selling shareholders may be
sold from time to time at fixed prices, at market prices prevailing at the time
of sale, at varying prices determined at the time of sale or at negotiated
prices. In addition, the selling shareholders may sell their shares covered by
this prospectus through customary brokerage channels, either through
broker-dealers acting as agents or brokers, or through broker-dealers acting as
principals, who may then resell the shares, or at private sale or otherwise, at
fixed prices, at market prices prevailing at the time of sale, at varying prices
determined at the time of sale or at negotiated prices. Such sales may be
effected in one or more transactions (which may involve block
transactions):
|
• |
on
any national securities exchange or quotation service on which the shares
of our common stock may be listed or quoted at the time of
sale; |
|
• |
in the over-the-counter market; |
|
• |
in
transactions otherwise than on exchanges or services or in the
over-the-counter market; or |
|
• |
through the writing of options. |
The
selling shareholders may effect such transactions by selling the shares to or
through broker-dealers, and such broker-dealers may receive compensation in the
form of underwriting discounts, concessions, commissions, or fees from the
selling shareholders and/or purchasers of the shares for whom such
broker-dealers may act as agent or to whom they sell as principal, or both
(which compensation to a particular broker-dealer might be in excess of
customary commissions).
The
selling shareholders may enter into hedging transactions with broker-dealers in
connection with distributions of the shares or otherwise. In these transactions,
broker-dealers may engage in short sales of the shares in the course of hedging
the positions they assume with selling shareholders. The selling shareholders
may also sell shares short and redeliver the shares to close out such short
positions. The selling shareholders may enter into options or other transactions
with broker-dealers that require the delivery to the broker-dealer of the
shares. The broker-dealer may then resell or otherwise transfer such shares
pursuant to this prospectus. The selling shareholders also may loan or pledge
the shares to a broker-dealer. The broker-dealer may sell the shares so loaned,
or upon default, the broker-dealer may sell the pledged shares pursuant to this
prospectus.
Any
broker-dealers that participate with the selling shareholders in the
distribution of the shares being offered pursuant to this prospectus may be
deemed to be underwriters and any commissions received by them and any profit on
the resale of shares positioned by them might be deemed to be underwriting
discounts and commissions within the meaning of the Securities Act, in
connection with such sales.
Any
shares covered by this prospectus that qualify for sale pursuant to Rule 144
under the Securities Act may be sold under Rule 144 rather than pursuant to this
prospectus.
Each
selling shareholder will be subject to applicable provisions of the Exchange Act
and the associated rules and regulations under the Exchange Act, including
Regulation M, which provisions may limit the timing of purchases and sales of
shares of our common stock by the selling shareholders.
LEGAL
MATTERS
The
validity of the shares of our common stock offered hereby has been passed upon
for us by Robinson & Cole LLP, Stamford, Connecticut.
EXPERTS
Our
consolidated financial statements as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, for each of
the three years in the period ended October 31, 2004, have been included in this
prospectus and in the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part
in reliance upon the report of KPMG LLP, registered public accounting firm,
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus and upon the authority of that firm as
experts in accounting and auditing.
WHERE
YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
We
have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a registration
statement on Form S-1 under the Securities Act with respect to the shares of our
common stock offered hereby. This prospectus, which constitutes a part of the
registration statement, does not contain all of the information set forth in the
registration statement or the exhibits and schedules filed therewith. For
further information about us and the common stock offered hereby, reference is
made to the registration statement and the exhibits and schedules filed
therewith. Statements contained in this prospectus regarding the contents of any
contract or any other document that is filed as an exhibit to the registration
statement are not necessarily complete, and each such statement is qualified in
all respects by reference to the full text of such contract or other document
filed as an exhibit to the registration statement. A copy of the registration
statement and the exhibits and schedules filed therewith may be inspected
without charge at the public reference room maintained by the SEC, located at
450 Fifth Street, N.W., Room 1200, Washington, D.C. 20549, and copies of
all or any part of the registration statement may be obtained from such offices
upon the payment of the fees prescribed by the SEC. Please call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330 for further information about the public reference room. The SEC
also maintains an Internet web site that contains reports, proxy and information
statements and other information regarding registrants that file electronically
with the SEC. The address of the site is http://www.sec.gov.
We
are subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and, therefore, we file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy
statements and other information with the SEC. Such periodic reports,
proxy statements and other information are available for inspection and copying
at the public reference room and web site of the SEC referred to above. Our
common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market, and you may also inspect
and copy our SEC filings at the offices of the National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc. located at 1735 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20549.
You
should rely only on the information provided in this prospectus and the
registration statement. We have not authorized anyone else to provide you with
different information. These securities are not being offered in any state
where the offer is not permitted. You should assume that the information
in this prospectus is accurate only as of the dates of those documents.
Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have
changed since those dates.
INDEX
TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
|
|
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, |
|
|
|
dated
January 11, 2005 |
|
|
F-1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets - October 31, 2004 and 2003 |
|
|
F-2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the Years |
|
|
|
|
ended
October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 |
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity |
|
|
|
|
for
the Years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 |
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Years ended |
|
|
|
|
October
31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 |
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Audited Financial Statements |
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of January 31, 2005 and |
|
|
|
|
October
31, 2004 (Unaudited) |
|
|
F-31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the three months ended |
|
|
|
|
January
31, 2005 and 2004 (Unaudited) |
|
|
F-32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended |
|
|
|
|
January
31, 2005 and 2004 (Unaudited) |
|
|
F-33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) |
|
|
F-34 |
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The
Board of Directors and Stockholders
FuelCell
Energy, Inc:
We
have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of FuelCell Energy,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended October 31, 2004.
These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated
financial statements 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 FuelCell Energy, Inc
and subsidiaries as of October 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period
ended October 31, 2004, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
/s/
KPMG LLP
KPMG
LLP
Hartford,
Connecticut
January
11, 2005
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
October 31,
2004 |
|
October 31,
2003 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
$ |
45,759 |
|
$ |
41,000 |
|
Investments:
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
106,636 |
|
|
93,750 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $79 and $60,
respectively |
|
|
|
|
|
7,599 |
|
|
4,948 |
|
Inventories,
net |
|
|
|
|
|
14,619 |
|
|
15,954 |
|
Other
current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
4,253 |
|
|
5,140 |
|
Total
current assets |
|
|
|
|
|
178,866 |
|
|
160,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
42,254 |
|
|
39,778 |
|
Investments:
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
18,690 |
|
Assets
held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
12,344 |
|
|
-- |
|
Equity
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
2,125 |
|
|
2,116 |
|
Other
assets, net |
|
|
|
|
|
921 |
|
|
1,987 |
|
Total
assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
236,510 |
|
$ |
223,363 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
$ |
539 |
|
$ |
323 |
|
Accounts
payable |
|
|
|
|
|
9,526 |
|
|
6,667 |
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
5,255 |
|
|
5,369 |
|
Deferred
license fee income |
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
37 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
6,713 |
|
|
4,398 |
|
Total
current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
22,070 |
|
|
16,794 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
1,484 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
23,546 |
|
|
18,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders’
equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock ($.0001 par value); 150,000,000 shares authorized at October 31,
2004 and October 31, 2003; 48,132,694 and 39,423,133 shares issued and
outstanding at October 31, 2004 and October 31, 2003,
respectively |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
4 |
|
Preferred
shares of subsidiary |
|
|
|
|
|
10,259 |
|
|
-- |
|
Additional
paid-in capital |
|
|
|
|
|
424,621 |
|
|
340,559 |
|
Accumulated
deficit |
|
|
|
|
|
(221,921 |
) |
|
(135,478 |
) |
Total
shareholders’ equity |
|
|
|
|
|
212,964 |
|
|
205,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity |
|
|
|
|
$ |
236,510 |
|
$ |
223,363 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended October 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
$ |
18,750 |
|
$ |
17,709 |
|
$ |
33,575 |
|
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
12,636 |
|
|
16,081 |
|
|
7,656 |
|
Total
revenues |
|
|
31,386 |
|
|
33,790 |
|
|
41,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of research and development contracts |
|
|
27,290 |
|
|
35,827 |
|
|
45,664 |
|
Cost
of product sales and revenues |
|
|
39,961 |
|
|
50,391 |
|
|
32,129 |
|
Administrative
and selling expenses |
|
|
14,901 |
|
|
12,631 |
|
|
10,451 |
|
Research
and development expenses |
|
|
26,677 |
|
|
8,509 |
|
|
6,806 |
|
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
12,200 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Total
costs and expenses |
|
|
121,029 |
|
|
107,358 |
|
|
95,050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from operations |
|
|
(89,643 |
) |
|
(73,568 |
) |
|
(53,819 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License
fee income, net |
|
|
19 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
270 |
|
Interest
expense |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
(128 |
) |
|
(160 |
) |
Interest
and other income, net |
|
|
2,472 |
|
|
6,012 |
|
|
4,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
before provision for income taxes |
|
|
(87,289 |
) |
|
(67,414 |
) |
|
(48,833 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(87,289 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
846 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Net
loss |
|
|
(86,443 |
) |
|
(67,414 |
) |
|
(48,840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share basic and diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations |
|
$ |
(1.82 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
Discontinued
operations |
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(1.81 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
47,875,342 |
|
|
39,342,345 |
|
|
39,135,256 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Shareholders' Equity
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Shares
Of
Common
Stock |
|
Shares
of Preferred Stock |
|
Common
Stock |
|
Preferred
Stock |
|
Additional
Paid-In
Capital |
|
Accumulated
Deficit |
|
Total
Shareholders’
Equity |
|
Balance
at October 31, 2001 |
|
|
38,998,788 |
|
|
-- |
|
$ |
4 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
338,936 |
|
$ |
(19,224 |
) |
$ |
319,716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of common stock under benefit plans |
|
|
16,324 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
219 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
219 |
|
Stock
options exercised |
|
|
213,716 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
307 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
307 |
|
Common
stock and equity investment costs |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
300 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
300 |
|
Net
loss |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(48,840 |
) |
|
(48,840 |
) |
Balance
at October 31, 2002 |
|
|
39,228,828 |
|
|
-- |
|
$ |
4 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
339,762 |
|
$ |
(68,064 |
) |
$ |
271,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of common stock under benefit plans |
|
|
33,620 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
171 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
171 |
|
Stock
options exercised |
|
|
165,068 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
666 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
666 |
|
Common
stock retired for non-cash exercise of options |
|
|
(4,383 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
(40 |
) |
Net
loss |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(67,414 |
) |
|
(67,414 |
) |
Balance
at October 31, 2003 |
|
|
39,423,133 |
|
|
-- |
|
$ |
4 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
340,559 |
|
$ |
(135,478 |
) |
$ |
205,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of common stock and assumption of stock options in connection with
acquisition, net |
|
|
8,159,657 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
1 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
81,811 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
81,812 |
|
Assumption
of preferred stock in connection with acquisition, at fair
value |
|
|
-- |
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
9,100 |
|
Accretion
of fair value discount of preferred stock |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
(1,159 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. warrants earned |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
534 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
534 |
|
Payment
of preferred dividends |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
(378 |
) |
Issuance
of common stock under benefit plans |
|
|
34,106 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
279 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
279 |
|
Stock
options exercised |
|
|
515,798 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
2,975 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
2,975 |
|
Net
loss |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(86,443 |
) |
|
(86,443 |
) |
Balance
at October 31, 2004 |
|
|
48,132,694 |
|
|
1,000,000 |
|
$ |
5 |
|
$ |
10,259 |
|
$ |
424,621 |
|
$ |
(221,921 |
) |
$ |
212,964 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended October 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(86,443 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
net
cash used in operating activities, net of effects of
acquisitions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Income)
from discontinued operations |
|
|
(846 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Depreciation
and amortization |
|
|
8,411
|
|
|
6,374
|
|
|
3,783
|
|
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
12,200
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
291
|
|
Loss
on disposal of property |
|
|
8
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
63
|
|
Provision
for doubtful accounts |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
(25 |
) |
|
(65 |
) |
(Increase)
decrease in operating assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable |
|
|
(2,619 |
) |
|
5,515
|
|
|
(3,263 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
1,333
|
|
|
(1,973 |
) |
|
(7,647 |
) |
Other
current assets |
|
|
2,436
|
|
|
(1,824 |
) |
|
(2,659 |
) |
Increase
(decrease) in operating liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
|
1,388
|
|
|
1,955
|
|
|
33
|
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
(2,762 |
) |
|
(2,403 |
) |
|
1,141
|
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
|
2,315
|
|
|
932
|
|
|
2,068
|
|
Deferred
license fee income and other |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(64,611 |
) |
|
(58,835 |
) |
|
(55,094 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures |
|
|
(7,921 |
) |
|
(6,630 |
) |
|
(15,373 |
) |
Cash
acquired from acquisition of Global |
|
|
53,004
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Thermoelectric,
Inc., net of transactions costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale
of Global Thermoelectric Inc., net of transaction costs |
|
|
15,913
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Treasury
notes matured |
|
|
101,546
|
|
|
155,659
|
|
|
82,500
|
|
Treasury
notes purchased |
|
|
(96,433 |
) |
|
(150,680 |
) |
|
(167,288 |
) |
Investment
in Versa Power Systems |
|
|
-- |
|
|
(1,500 |
) |
|
(500 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash used in investing activities |
|
|
66,109
|
|
|
(3,151 |
) |
|
(100,661 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long
term debt borrowings |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
787
|
|
Repayment
on long-term debt |
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
(306 |
) |
|
(233 |
) |
Payment
of preferred dividends |
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Common
stock and equity investment costs |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
300
|
|
Common
stock issued for option and stock purchase plans |
|
|
3,240
|
|
|
797
|
|
|
526
|
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
2,702
|
|
|
491
|
|
|
1,380
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Cash provided by discontinued operations |
|
|
559
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
4,759
|
|
|
(61,495 |
) |
|
(154,375 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents-beginning of year |
|
|
41,000
|
|
|
102,495
|
|
|
256,870
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents-end of year |
|
$ |
45,759 |
|
$ |
41,000 |
|
$ |
102,495 |
|
See
accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Nature
of Business
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. is engaged in the development and commercialization of carbonate
fuel cell technology for stationary power generation. We manufacture carbonate
fuel cells, generally on a contract basis. We are currently in the process of
commercializing our Direct FuelCell technology and expect to incur losses as we
expand our product development, commercialization program and manufacturing
operations.
The
consolidated financial statements include accounts of FuelCell Energy, Inc. and
its subsidiaries. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
Alliance
Monterrey, LLC and Alliance Chico, LLC are joint ventures with Alliance
Power, Inc. to construct fuel cell power plants and sell power under power
purchase agreements with the City of Santa Barbara and the Sierra Nevada Brewery
Co. The financial results of the joint ventures were consolidated with those of
FuelCell Energy, which owns
80 percent of each entity.
Certain
reclassifications have been made to our prior year financial statements to
conform to the 2004 presentation.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash
equivalents consist primarily of investments in money market funds and United
States Treasury securities with original maturities averaging three months or
less at date of acquisition. We place our temporary cash investments with high
credit quality financial institutions.
Investments
Investments
consist of United States Treasury securities with original maturities of greater
than three months at the date of acquisition. The notes are classified as held
to maturity since we have the ability and intention to hold them until maturity.
The notes are being carried at amortized cost, which is par value, plus or minus
unamortized premium or discount. Such notes are classified as current assets
when remaining maturities are one year or less, and as non-current assets when
remaining maturities are greater than one year.
Inventories
Inventories
consist principally of raw materials and work-in-process and are stated at the
lower of cost or market.
Raw
materials consist mainly of various nickel powders and steels, and various other
components used in producing cell stacks. Work-in-process inventory is comprised
of material, labor, and overhead costs incurred by us to build fuel cell stacks,
which are subcomponents of power generation systems, which have not yet been
dedicated to a particular research and development contract, field trial, or
commercial customer, (collectively the “end users”), and which are estimated to
be fully recovered from the end users. In instances where costs incurred exceed
anticipated recovery, those excess costs are charged to cost of product sales
and revenues as incurred.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation provided
on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective
assets. Leasehold improvements are amortized on the straight-line method over
the shorter of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the term of the
lease.
When
property is sold or otherwise disposed of, the cost and related accumulated
depreciation are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or loss is
reflected in operations for the period.
Intellectual
Property
Intellectual
property, including internally generated patents and know-how, is carried at no
value.
Impairment
of Long Lived Assets
Long-lived
assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be recoverable. If
events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the
assets may not be recoverable, we compare the carrying amount of the assets to
future undiscounted net cash flows, excluding interest costs, expected to be
generated by the assets and their ultimate disposition. If the sum of the
undiscounted cash flows is less than the carrying value, the impairment to be
recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying amount of the assets
exceeds the fair value of the assets. Assets to be disposed of are reported at
the lower of the carrying amount or fair value, less costs to sell.
Revenue
Recognition
Our
revenue is primarily generated from agencies of the U.S. government and
customers located throughout the United States, Europe and Asia. We generally
require a down payment with the acceptance of a purchase order from a
customer.
We
contract with our customers to perform research and development or manufacture
and install fuel cell components and power plants under long-term contracts. We
recognize revenue on a method similar to the percentage-of-completion
method.
Revenues
on fuel cell research and development contracts are recognized proportionally as
costs are incurred and compared to the estimated total research and development
costs for each contract. In many cases, we are reimbursed only a portion of the
costs incurred or to be incurred on the contract. Revenues from government
funded research, development and demonstration programs are generally
multi-year, cost reimbursement and/or cost shared type contracts or cooperative
agreements. We are reimbursed for reasonable and allocable costs up to the
reimbursement limits set by the contract or cooperative agreement.
While
government research and development contracts may extend for many years,
oftentimes funding is provided incrementally on a year-by-year basis if contract
terms are met and Congress has authorized the funds. As of October 31, 2004,
research and development sales backlog totaled $16.4 million, of which 78
percent is funded. Should funding be temporarily delayed or if business
initiatives change, we may choose to devote resources to other activities,
including internally funded research and development.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Product
sales and revenues include revenues from product sales and service contracts.
Revenues from fuel cell product
sales are recognized proportionally as costs are incurred and assigned to a
customer contract by comparing the estimated total manufacture and installation
costs for each contract to the total contract value. Revenues from service
contacts are recognized ratably over the contract term while costs are expensed
as incurred.
As
our fuel cell products are in their early stages of development and market
acceptance, actual costs incurred could differ materially from those previously
estimated. Once we have established that our fuel cell products have achieved
commercial market acceptance and future costs can be reasonably estimated, then
estimated costs to complete an individual contract, in excess of revenue, will
be accrued immediately upon identification.
License
Fee Income / Expense Recognition
License
fee income arises from an agreement with MTU CFC Solutions GmbH (“MTU”), a
division of DaimlerChrysler, our European partner, in which we granted MTU an
exclusive license to use our Direct FuelCell patent rights and know-how in
Europe and the Middle East, and a non-exclusive license in South America and
Africa, subject to certain rights of others and us, in each case for a royalty.
Amounts received are deferred and recognized ratably over the term of the
agreement. We recognized approximately $0.3 million of license fee income during
each of the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002.
License
fee expense arises from royalty agreements with MTU, Santa Clara and Electric
Power Research Institute (EPRI) pursuant to which we have agreed to pay
royalties based upon certain milestones or events relating to the sale of
carbonate fuel cells. We have accrued approximately $0.3 million of royalty
expense under these agreements in fiscal 2004 (which was off-set against royalty
income on the consolidated statements of operations).
Deferred
Revenue
We
bill customers based upon certain milestones being reached. These billings are
deferred and recognized as revenue based upon the Revenue/License Fee Revenue
Recognition policy summarized above.
Warrant
Value Recognition
Warrants
have been issued as sales incentives to certain of our business partners. As we
recognize the associated revenue for orders placed in accordance with these
sales agreements, a proportional amount of the fair value of the warrants will
be recorded against the revenue.
Research
and Development
Our
cost of research and development contracts reflects costs incurred under
specific customer-sponsored research and development contracts. These costs
consist of both manufacturing and engineering labor, including applicable
overhead expenses, materials to build prototype units, materials for testing,
and other costs associated with our research and development
contracts.
Our
research and development expenses reflect costs incurred for internal research
and development projects conducted without specific customer-sponsored
contracts. These costs consist primarily of labor, overhead, materials to build
prototype units, materials for testing, consulting fees and other costs
associated with our internal research and development expenses.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Income
Taxes
Income
taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax
assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences
attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of
existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating
loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the
years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or
settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax
rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. A
valuation allowance is recorded against deferred tax assets if it is unlikely
that some or all of the deferred tax assets will be realized.
Use
of Estimates
The
preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported
amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and revenues
and expenses during the period reported. Actual results could differ from those
estimates. Estimates are used in accounting for, among other things, allowances
for uncollectible receivables, excess or slow-moving inventories, obsolete
inventories, impairment of assets, product warranty, depreciation and
amortization, taxes, and contingencies. Estimates and assumptions are reviewed
periodically, and the effects of revisions are reflected in the consolidated
financial statements in the period they are determined to be
necessary.
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
Comprehensive
income (loss) is the increase or decrease in equity from sources other than
owners. Our comprehensive loss equals net loss as reported on our consolidated
statement of operations totaling $(86,443), $(67,414), and $(48,840) for the
years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Stock-Based
Compensation
Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation”, encourages entities to recognize the fair value of all
stock-based awards on the date of grant as expense over the vesting period.
Alternatively, SFAS No. 123 allows entities to continue to apply the intrinsic
value method provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25
and provide pro forma net income and pro forma earnings per share disclosures
for employees’ stock option grants as if the fair-value-based method defined in
SFAS No. 123 had been applied. We apply the pro forma disclosure provisions of
SFAS No. 123. Accordingly, no compensation expense was recorded in the statement
of operations. The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net
loss per basic and diluted share as if we had applied the fair value method to
our stock-based compensation, as required under the disclosure provisions of
SFAS No. 123:
|
|
|
Years
ended October 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
Net
loss, as reported |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(86,443 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
Less:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under the fair
value method for all awards |
|
|
|
|
|
(9,690 |
) |
|
(8,911 |
) |
|
(8,412 |
) |
Pro
forma net income |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(96,133 |
) |
$ |
(76,325 |
) |
$ |
(57,252 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per basic and diluted common share, as reported |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1.81 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
$ |
(1.25 |
) |
Pro
forma loss per basic and diluted common share |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2.01 |
) |
$ |
(1.94 |
) |
$ |
(1.46 |
) |
Foreign
Currency Translation
Our
Canadian operations are considered financially and operationally integrated and
therefore the temporal method of translation of foreign currencies is followed.
Under the temporal method, foreign currency gains or losses are recorded on the
statement of operations. The functional currency is U.S. dollars. Monetary items
are translated at period end exchange rates; non-monetary items are translated
at historical exchange rates; revenue and expense items are translated at
average rates of exchange prevailing during the period; and depreciation and
amortization are translated at the same exchange rate as the assets to which
they relate. Monetary items consist primarily of current assets and current
liabilities, such as cash, cash equivalents and investments and accounts
payable, which are denominated in non-U.S. currencies. We recognized
approximately $0.5 million in foreign currency gain during the year ended
October 31, 2004. This amount has been classified in interest and other income
on our consolidated statement of operations. No foreign currency gain or loss
was recognized in prior years.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123 (revised 2004)
(“SFAS No. 123R”), “Share-Based Payment” which revised SFAS No. 123, “Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation. This statement supercedes APB Opinion No. 25,
“Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” The revised statement addresses the
accounting for share-based payment transactions with employees and other third
parties, eliminates the ability to account for share-based compensation
transactions using APB 25 and requires that the compensation costs relating to
such transactions be recognized in the consolidated statement of operations. The
revised statement is effective as of the first interim period beginning after
June 15, 2005. The Company is currently evaluating the provisions of SFAS No.
123R and will adopt it on August 1, 2005 as required.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In
November 2004, the FASB ratified the consensus reached by the Emerging Issues
Task Force (“EITF”), on Issue No. 03-13, “Applying the Conditions in Paragraph
42 of FASB Statement No. 144 in Determining Whether to Report Discontinued
Operations”. The Issue provides a model to assist in evaluating (a) which cash
flows should be considered in the determination of whether cash flows of the
disposal component have been or will be eliminated from the ongoing operations
of the entity and (b) the types of continuing involvement that constitute
significant continuing involvement in the operations of the disposal component.
Should significant continuing ongoing involvement exist, then the disposal
component shall be reported in the results of continuing operations on the
consolidated statements of operations and cash flows. The Company has applied
the provisions of this accounting standard to its financial
statements.
Refer to Note 2. - Discontinued Operations and Sale of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell
Assets.
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs,” which
amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing,” to
clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight,
handling costs, and wasted material. This Statement requires that those items be
recognized as current-period charges regardless of whether they meet the
criterion of “so abnormal.” In addition, this Statement requires allocation of
fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. The Company is currently evaluating the
provisions of SFAS No. 151 and will it adopt on November 1, 2005,
as required.
In
December 2003, the FASB issued FIN No. 46R, “Consolidation of Variable
Interest Entities,” which requires an entity to consolidate a variable interest
entity if it is designated as the primary beneficiary of that entity even if the
entity does not have a majority of voting interests. A variable interest entity
is generally defined as an entity where its equity is inadequate to finance its
activities or where the owners of the entity lack the risk and rewards of
ownership. The Company has evaluated the provisions of FIN No. 46R, as
required, and determined that the Company did not have any material interest
entities and did not have any variable interest entities that require
consolidation into the Company’s financial statements.
Note
2. Discontinued Operations and Sale of Solid Oxide Fuel
Cell Assets
During
fiscal 2004, we acquired, Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global) and subsequently
divested its business units through the sale of Global on May 28, 2004 and the
combination of our Canadian solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) operations with Versa
Power Systems (Versa), which was agreed to in October 2004 and closed in
November 2004.
Sale
of Global Thermoelectric Inc.
On
May 28, 2004, we completed the sale of Global, and its TEG product line, for
proceeds of approximately U.S. $15.9 million. Our SOFC technology development
group, including intellectual property, employees, and manufacturing, research
and development facilities, was consolidated into a new Canadian subsidiary,
FuelCell Energy, Ltd. (formerly FCE Canada Inc.). Assets and liabilities
relating to the SOFC business and the majority of Global’s cash was transferred
to FuelCell Energy, Ltd. and FuelCell Energy, Inc. prior to the sale. In
addition, the Global Series 2 Preferred Shares were cancelled, and replaced with
substantially equivalent Series 1 Preferred Shares issued by FuelCell Energy,
Ltd.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
The
following assets and liabilities of Global were divested:
Assets |
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$ |
731 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net |
|
|
3,245 |
|
Inventories,
net |
|
|
3,836
|
|
Other
assets |
|
|
156 |
|
Intangible
assets |
|
|
1,733 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net |
|
|
1,573 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
10,457 |
|
Total
assets sold |
|
$ |
21,731 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
$ |
536 |
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
3,225 |
|
Long-term
debt and other liabilities |
|
|
417 |
|
Total
liabilities sold |
|
$ |
4,178 |
|
The
following table represents the results of this discontinued operation, net of
related income taxes:
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended
October
31, 2004(1) |
|
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
|
|
$ |
13,079 |
|
Cost
of product sales |
|
|
|
|
|
9,853 |
|
Operating
expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
Operating
income |
|
|
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
163 |
|
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
$ |
846 |
|
(1) As we acquired Global on November 3, 2003, there were no discontinued
operations in the prior year.
Sale
of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Assets
On
October 19, 2004, we signed a definitive agreement to transfer substantially all
of our Canadian SOFC assets and operations (including manufacturing and test
equipment, intellectual property and personnel) to Versa Power Systems, Ltd. In
exchange, we received 5,714 shares of Versa Power Systems, Inc. common stock,
increasing our ownership position in Versa to 7,714 shares, or 42 percent. No
cash was exchanged in the transaction. The consideration received by us in the
transaction was determined based upon arms-length negotiations of the parties.
This transaction closed on November 1, 2004. Refer to Note 20. - Subsequent
Events.
Assets
sold to Versa totaled approximately $12.4 million and are classified as held for
sale on the consolidated balance sheet as of October 31, 2004.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The
following assets of the SOFC operation were divested:
Assets |
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
7,489 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
4,816 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
39 |
|
Total
assets sold |
|
$ |
12,344 |
|
As
defined by EITF Issue 03-13, the Company will have an ongoing significant
involvement in SOFC Operation given its 42 percent ownership interest.
Therefore, results of the Canadian SOFC operation have been reported as
continuing operations in the consolidated statements of operations and cash
flows. In future periods, we will account for our ownership in Versa Power
Systems, Inc, under the equity method of accounting.
Note
3. Business Combinations
Fiscal
2004 Summary
In
November 2003, we acquired Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global), a leading
developer of SOFC technology, headquartered in Calgary, Canada. Global was
comprised of two divisions:
· Manufacture
and sale of thermoelectric generators (TEG).
· Research
and development of solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC)
This
purpose of this acquisition was to strengthen
our capabilities for the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Solid
State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) program, which is funding the research
and development of small scale SOFC technology. The
acquisition also improved our financial position as Global had a cash and
investment balance totaling approximately $55.7 million and property, plant and
equipment in the SOFC division valued at approximately $11.2 million.
In
May 2004, we sold Global and the TEG product line. We retained the SOFC
technology
development group including intellectual property, employees, and manufacturing,
research and development facilities. On October 19, 2004, we signed a definitive
agreement to transfer substantially all of our Canadian SOFC assets and
operations (including manufacturing and test equipment, intellectual property
and personnel) to Versa Power Systems, Ltd. Refer to Note 2 - Discontinued
Operations and Sale of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Assets for further disclosure on
these divestitures.
Acquisition
of Global Thermoelectric Inc.
On
November 3, 2003, we completed our acquisition of Global, a leading developer of
SOFC technology, headquartered in Calgary, Canada. We believe this acquisition
strengthens
our capabilities for the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Solid
State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) program.
As
consideration in this acquisition, we issued approximately 8.2 million shares of
common stock (or equivalents) valued at approximately $80.8 million. We also
assumed the Global stock option plan valued at approximately $1.0 million,
preferred shares with a fair value at the time of acquisition of approximately
$9.1 million, and incurred transaction costs of approximately $3.9 million. The
total purchase price was calculated at approximately $94.8 million. Pursuant to
the terms of the Global acquisition agreement, there was a collar set in
determining the exchange ratio. Specifically, if FuelCell’s stock price closed
at a 20 day “daily volume-weighted-average trading price”:
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
· greater
than $9.74, the exchange ratio would be 0.279 shares of FuelCell Energy common
stock for each share of Global common stock;
· less
than $7.96, the exchange ratio would be 0.342 shares of FuelCell Energy common
stock for each share of Global common stock; and
· between
$7.96 and $9.74, the Global common shareholders would receive approximately
$2.72
of FuelCell Energy common stock (or exchangeable shares) for each Global share
held.
The
measurement date was determined in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) Issue No. 99-12 - “Determination of the Measurement Date for the Market
Price of Acquirer Securities Issued in a Purchase Business Combination”. EITF
99-12 states that the measurement date is the date at “which the number of
acquirer shares and the amount of consideration become fixed and determinable
without subsequent revision.” In this transaction, the measurement date on which
the shares to be issued became fixed and determinable was September 11, 2003 and
the common stock valuation price was $9.91. Given this valuation price and
according to the terms of the combination agreement, the exchange ratio was
0.279.
In
accordance with SFAS 141, “Business Combinations”, we allocated the purchase
price to the tangible assets, liabilities and intangible assets acquired, as
well as in-process research and development based on their estimated fair
values. The excess purchase price over the fair value was recorded as goodwill.
The initial purchase price allocation was subsequently adjusted due to the sale
of Global and the TEG product line. Assets and liabilities of the TEG product
line were classified as held for sale as of the acquisition date. The adjusted
purchase price allocation is as follows:
|
|
Purchase
Price Allocation |
|
Cash
and investments |
|
$ |
55,781 |
|
Property
and equipment |
|
|
11,193
|
|
Other
assets |
|
|
641
|
|
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
(5,185 |
) |
Accrued
restructuring costs |
|
|
(1,261 |
) |
Long
term debt and other liabilities |
|
|
(353 |
) |
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
12,200
|
|
Assets
held for sale(1) |
|
|
19,107
|
|
Liabilities
held for sale |
|
|
(2,061 |
) |
Goodwill |
|
|
4,760
|
|
Investment
in Global |
|
$ |
94,822 |
|
(1) -
Assets held for sale includes goodwill totaling approximately $10.5 million. The
amount of goodwill allocated as held for sale was determined to be the cash
price paid by the acquiring company (net of selling costs) less the net fair
value of the assets and liabilities sold.
Purchased
in-process research and development
In
1997, Global began developing SOFC technology, which is a ceramic planar (flat,
square or rectangular) cell, with a solid electrolyte that is anode supported
(the thickest component to which all other materials are subsequently mounted)
and conducts oxygen ions. Global has developed a proprietary microstructure that
gives its fuel cells very high power densities (the amount of power measured in
watts per square centimeter of surface area).
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The
$12.2 million allocated to in-process research and development (IPR&D) was
determined using two established valuation techniques. The cost approach
valuation method was used because the SOFC technology is early in its
development cycle and reliable forecasts of future benefit do not exist. The
market approach method was used to estimate the implied value of the SOFC
technology by estimating the fair value of the generator product line, adding
net cash assumed in the acquisition, and then subtracting this total amount from
the cash and stock consideration paid. An average of these two valuation
techniques was used to determine the IPR&D amount. The amounts estimated in
this valuation were calculated using a risk-adjusted discount rate of 30
percent. As the acquired technology has not yet reached technological
feasibility and no alternative future uses exist, it was expensed upon
acquisition in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 2, “Accounting for Research and Development Costs.”
The
IPR&D acquired was related to one project, the development of a solid oxide
fuel cell. Prior to the transaction date, Global spent approximately five years
developing this technology. In 2003, we received notice of an award to
participate in the DOE’s ten-year SECA program to develop low cost solid oxide
fuel cells for residential, commercial, and light industrial applications. We
currently estimate that it will take between five and ten years to complete the
development. The SECA program is a ten-year cost-share program totaling
approximately $139 million.
Proforma
Financial Information
Proforma
information has not been provided as the businesses acquired were subsequently
sold during fiscal 2004.
Note
4. Investments
Our
short and long term investments are in U.S. treasury securities, which are held
to maturity. The following table summarizes the amortized cost basis and fair
value at October 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
Amortized
Cost |
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains |
|
Gross
Unrealized
(losses) |
|
Fair
Value |
|
At
October 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government obligations |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(190 |
) |
$ |
106,446 |
|
At
October 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government obligations |
|
$ |
112,440 |
|
$ |
108 |
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
$ |
112,531 |
|
Reported
as:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
Short-term
investments |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
$ |
93,750 |
|
Long-term
investments |
|
|
-- |
|
|
18,690 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
$ |
112,440 |
|
Short-term
investments securities have maturity dates ranging from November 15, 2004 to
August 31, 2005, and estimated yields ranging from 1.0 percent to 2.1 percent.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Note
5. Inventories
The
components of inventory at October 31, 2004 and October 31, 2003 consisted of
the following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw
materials |
|
$ |
1,663 |
|
$ |
3,611 |
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
12,956 |
|
|
12,343 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
14,619 |
|
$ |
15,954 |
|
Our
inventories are stated at the lower of recoverable cost or market price. We
provide for a lower of cost or market (LCM) adjustment against gross inventory
values. Our LCM adjustment, reducing gross inventory values to the reported
amounts, was approximately $12.4 million and $10.8 million at October 31, 2004
and 2003, respectively.
Note
6. Accounts Receivable
Accounts
receivable at October 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of the following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Government: |
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
billed |
|
$ |
850 |
|
$ |
725 |
|
Unbilled
recoverable costs |
|
|
1,804 |
|
|
1,594 |
|
Retainage |
|
|
44 |
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
|
2,698 |
|
|
3,238 |
|
Commercial
Customers: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
billed |
|
|
1,368 |
|
|
878 |
|
Unbilled
recoverable costs |
|
|
3,533 |
|
|
831 |
|
Retainage |
|
|
- |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
4,901 |
|
|
1,710 |
|
|
|
$ |
7,599 |
|
$ |
4,948 |
|
Retainage
represents amounts billed but not paid by customers pursuant to retainage
provisions in the contracts that will be due upon completion of the contracts
and acceptance by the customer and that may be collected over more than one
year.
Unbilled
recoverable costs represent amounts of revenue recognized on costs incurred on
contracts in progress that are generally billed within the next 30 days.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Note
7. Property, Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment at October 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of the
following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
Estimated
Useful
Life |
|
Land |
|
$ |
524 |
|
$ |
524 |
|
|
— |
|
Building
and improvements |
|
|
6,824 |
|
|
5,837 |
|
|
10-30
years |
|
Machinery,
equipment and software |
|
|
48,576 |
|
|
48,225 |
|
|
3-8
years |
|
Furniture
and fixtures |
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
2,184 |
|
|
6-10
years |
|
Assets
available for lease(1) |
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
-- |
|
|
3
years |
|
Construction
in progress(2) |
|
|
6,645 |
|
|
2,825 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
66,849 |
|
$ |
59,595 |
|
|
|
|
Less,
accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(24,595 |
) |
|
(19,817 |
) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
42,254 |
|
$ |
39,778 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
-
Assets available for lease are two DFC 300 power plants which the company
has designated available for lease. One of these assets is currently under
lease to a customer and another is on loan to a government test
facility. |
(2) |
-
Included in construction in progress are costs to build power plants,
which will service power purchase agreement (PPA) contracts. These plants
are being constructed by joint ventures, which the Company is an 80
percent owner and, as a result, consolidated on our financial
statements. |
Depreciation
expense was $6.5 million, $5.5 million and $3.1 million for the years ended
October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Note
8. Other Assets
The
components of other current assets at October 31, 2004 and October 31, 2003
consisted of the following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
Advance
payments to vendors (1) |
|
$ |
2,256 |
|
$ |
169 |
|
Prepaid
transaction costs (2) |
|
|
- |
|
|
2,582 |
|
R&D
tax credit receivable (3) |
|
|
456 |
|
|
1,120 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other |
|
|
1,541 |
|
|
1,269 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,253 |
|
$ |
5,140 |
|
(1) |
-
Advance payments to vendors related to inventory purchases. We provide for
a lower of cost or market adjustment against these advance payments. This
adjustment totaled approximately $1.1 million and $0.2 million at October
31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. |
(2) |
-
Consists of legal and professional costs accumulated related to the
acquisition of Global Thermoelectric Inc. which were in the purchase price
accounting as of the time of acquisition. |
(3) |
-
Current
portion of state research and development tax credits receivable. The
majority of this balance is expected to be collected in fiscal
2005. |
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Other
long-term assets at October 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of the
following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
Power
plant license (1) |
|
$ |
531 |
|
$ |
820 |
|
State
research and development tax credits receivable |
|
|
-- |
|
|
1,045 |
|
Deposits
and other |
|
|
390 |
|
|
122 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
921 |
|
$ |
1,987 |
|
(1) |
-
The power plant license is being amortized over 10 years on a
straight-line basis. Accumulated amortization was $2.0 million and $1.7
million at October 31, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. |
Note
9. Equity investments
Equity
investments include our investment in Versa Power Systems, Inc. totaling $2.0
million, which we account for on the cost basis of accounting. As of October 31,
2004 we held an ownership interest of approximately 16 percent in this
non-public entity. Refer to Note - 20 subsequent events regarding our additional
investment in Versa. We also have a 25 percent ownership interest in Xiamen
Technology Co. LTD totaling approximately $0.1 million in which is accounted for
under the equity method of accounting.
Note
10. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued
liabilities at October 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of the
following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
payroll and employee benefits |
|
$ |
3,004 |
|
$ |
2,842 |
|
Accrued
contract and operating costs |
|
|
913 |
|
|
1,955 |
|
Accrued
severance related costs |
|
|
808 |
|
|
-- |
|
Accrued
taxes and other |
|
|
530 |
|
|
572 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,255 |
|
$ |
5,369 |
|
Note
11. Long-Term Debt and Other Liabilities
Long-term
debt and other liabilities include long term debt, capital leases and other
long-term liabilities.
Long-term
debt
Long-term
debt at October 31, 2004 and 2003 consisted of the following:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable |
|
$ |
1,388 |
|
$ |
1,685 |
|
Less
- current portion |
|
|
(345 |
) |
|
(323 |
) |
Long-term
debt, less current portion |
|
$ |
1,043 |
|
$ |
1,362 |
|
On
June 29, 2000, we entered into a loan agreement, secured by machinery and
equipment, and have borrowed an aggregate of $2.2 million under the agreement.
The loan is payable over seven years, with payments of interest only for the
first six months and then repaid in monthly installments over the remaining six
and one-half years with interest computed annually based on the ten-year U.S.
Treasury note plus 2.5 percent. Our current interest rates at October 31, 2004
and October 31, 2003 were 7.2 percent and 5.9 percent, respectively.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In
October 2004 we entered in to a term loan agreement secured by the underlying
asset to finance the purchase of a vehicle. Aggregate amount borrowed was
approximately $0.02 million with an interest rate of 0.9 percent.
Aggregate
annual principal payments under the loan agreements for the years subsequent to
October 31, 2004 are as follows:
2005 |
|
$ |
345 |
|
2006 |
|
|
371 |
|
2007 |
|
|
396 |
|
2008 |
|
|
276 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
$ |
1,388 |
|
Capital
leases
In
fiscal 2004, we entered into capital equipment leases for a telephone and voice
mail system that expire in 2 years. At October 31, 2004 and 2003, the gross
amount of plant and equipment and related accumulated amortization recorded
under capital leases were as follows:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
Machinery,
equipment and software |
|
$ |
390 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
Less,
accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
-- |
|
Total |
|
$ |
382 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
Amortization
of assets held under capital leases is included with depreciation
expense.
Future
minimum capital lease payments (principal and interest) as of October 31,
2004 are:
|
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
Year
ending October 31: |
|
leases |
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
215 |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
Total
minimum lease payments |
|
|
|
|
|
341 |
|
Less
amount representing interest (at rates of approximately
9.91%) |
|
(25 |
) |
Present
value of net minimum capital lease payments |
|
|
|
|
|
316 |
|
Less
current installments of obligations under capital leases |
|
(194 |
) |
Obligations
under capital leases, excluding current installments |
|
|
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Other
long term liabilities
Other
long term liability balances at October 31, 2004 and 2003 totaled:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
long term liabilities |
|
$ |
311 |
|
$ |
122 |
|
Note
12. Shareholders' Equity
Options
and Stock Purchase Plan
At
October 31, 2004, 1,641,048 shares of common stock have been reserved for
issuance pursuant to our stock option plans and our Section 423 Stock Purchase
Plan. Refer to Note - 14 for additional disclosure related to these
plans.
Preferred
shares of subsidiary
In
conjunction with our acquisition of Global, the Company assumed the preferred
share obligation comprised of 1,000,000 Series 2 non-voting Preferred Shares.
With the sale of the Global entity in May of 2004, the Global Series 2 Preferred
Shares were cancelled, and replaced with substantially equivalent Series 1
Preferred Shares (Preferred Shares) issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The
Preferred Shares are convertible at the option of the holder into a number of
our common shares based on the fraction by which their face value of Cdn.$25.00
is of the conversion prices (in Canadian dollars) identified below:
Period
of conversion |
|
Conversion
price per share of FuelCell common stock in Canadian
Dollars(1) |
|
Conversion
price per share of FuelCell common stock
in
U.S. Dollars (1)
(2) |
To
July 31, 2005 |
|
Cdn.$110.97 |
|
$
84.34 |
August
1, 2005 to July 31, 2010 |
|
Cdn.$120.22 |
|
$
91.31 |
August
1, 2010 to July 31, 2015 |
|
Cdn.$129.46 |
|
$
98.39 |
August
1, 2015 to July 31, 2020 |
|
Cdn.$138.71 |
|
$
105.42 |
After
July 31, 2020 |
|
95%
of the market trading price of FuelCell Energy’s common stock at the time
of conversion (expressed in Canadian dollars) |
|
95%
of the market trading price of FuelCell Energy’s common stock at the time
of conversion |
(1) |
The
foregoing “conversion prices” are subject to adjustment for certain
subsequent events. |
(2) |
While
the conversion of preferred shares is based on the prices of FuelCell
Energy’s common stock expressed in Canadian dollars, we have provided this
example of conversion prices in U.S. dollars assuming a constant exchange
rate of 0.76 U.S. dollars to 1.00 Canadian dollar (which was the exchange
rate at the date of acquisition). The conversion price in U.S. dollars
will increase or decrease over time as currency rates
fluctuate. |
The
number of our common shares issuable upon conversion will decline as the
conversion prices increase according to the table above until July 31, 2020.
After July 31, 2020, the holder has the right to convert the preferred shares
into FuelCell common stock at a price equal to 95 percent of our common stock’s
trading price at the time of conversion. Thus, the number of common shares
issuable after July 31, 2020, could be greater than amounts issuable prior to
that date.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Quarterly
dividends of Cdn.$312,500 accrue on the Preferred Shares (subject to possible
reduction pursuant to the terms of the Preferred Shares on account of increases
in the price of FuelCell’s common stock). We have agreed to pay a minimum of
Cdn.$500,000 in cash or common stock annually to Enbridge, Inc., the holder of
the Preferred Shares, so long as Enbridge holds the shares. Interest accrues on
cumulative unpaid dividends at a 2.45 percent quarterly rate, compounded
quarterly, until payment thereof. All cumulative unpaid dividends must be paid
by December 31, 2010. From 2010 through 2020, we would be required to pay annual
dividend amounts totaling Cdn.$1.25 million. During the year ended October 31,
2004, we paid cash dividends totaling Cdn. $500,000 to Enbridge.
The
Preferred Shares may be redeemed by the Company, in whole or part, if on the day
that the notice of redemption is first given, the volume-weighted average price
at which FuelCell's common shares are traded is at least a 20 percent premium to
the current conversion price on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Preferred Share to be
redeemed, together with an amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends to
the date fixed for redemption. On or after July 31, 2010, the Preferred Shares
are redeemable at any time on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Preferred Share to be
redeemed together with an amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends to
the date fixed for redemption.
As
of the November 3, 2003 acquisition date of Global, the fair value of the
preferred shares was determined to be $9.1 million. This valuation of these
shares was performed using the income approach to estimate the fair value of the
securities based on expected future economic benefits. In applying this method,
cash flows are estimated for the life of the securities and then discounted to
present value to arrive at an indication of fair value. Amounts projected and
then discounted included future dividend payments and conversion of the
securities in 2020. Implicit in this valuation are certain assumptions regarding
timing and payment of dividends and the ultimate conversion of the securities.
In discounting future cash flows, a discount rate of 13 percent was used which
is a rate comparable to yield indexes of technology high yield bonds trading as
of the valuation date. In addition to the discount rate, as these securities are
not publicly traded, the valuation assumed an additional marketability discount
of 15 percent.
The
fair value of the preferred shares is adjusted quarterly to reflect dividend
payments and accretion of the fair value discount.
Warrants
On
April 6, 2004, we issued warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of our common
stock to Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni) in conjunction with a revised
distribution agreement. Pursuant to the terms of this agreement, Marubeni placed
orders for 4 megawatts of DFC power plants, and committed to creating a
sub-distributor network and to provide additional support for our products. All
previously issued warrants to Marubeni were cancelled. As part of the new
warrant agreements, the warrants vest in separate tranches once Marubeni has
ordered totals of between 5 MW and 45 MW of our products. The exercise prices of
the warrants range from $13.78 to $18.73 per share and the warrants will expire
between April 2005 and April 2007, if not exercised sooner.
Concurrent
with the April 6, 2004 agreement, the first tranche of 200,000 warrants vested.
The fair value of these warrants was determined to be $0.5 million. This has
been recorded as other current assets on the consolidated balance sheet with the
offsetting entry to additional paid in capital. In accordance with our warrant
value recognition policy, a proportional amount of the fair value of the
warrants will be recorded against the revenue, when recognized, as a sales
discount. To date, discounts of approximately $0.1 million have been recognized
against revenue. As of October 31, 2004, these warrants had not been
exercised.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
On
November 4, 2003, we signed an agreement with Enbridge, Inc. to sell DFC
products in Canada. As part of the agreement, Enbridge received warrants to
purchase 500,000 shares of FuelCell Energy common stock exercisable on a
graduated scale based on order flow. The full quantity of warrants will vest
with order commitments for 20 megawatts of DFC power plants. The exercise prices
of the warrants range from $14.65 to $19.04 per share and the warrants will
expire in November 2006, if not exercised sooner. As of October 31, 2004 these
warrants had not vested.
We
had issued warrants enabling Caterpillar, Inc. (Caterpillar) to purchase up to
1,500,000 shares of our common stock that would be earned on a graduated scale
contingent upon the level of order commitments to purchase our products. These
warrants have expired as of October 31, 2004.
Investments
by Strategic Partners
Three
of our key business partners are shareholders of FuelCell Energy; MTU CFC
Solutions GmbH (“MTU”), PPL Energy Plus LLC (“PPL”) and Marubeni, Inc.
(“Marubeni”). These business partners have less then a 10 percent ownership
interest in the Company and do not exercise management control over the
business.
Note
13. Segment Information and Major Customers
Under
SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information,” we use the “management” approach to reporting segments. The
management approach designates the internal organization that is used by
management for making operating decisions and assessing performance as the
source of reportable segments. SFAS No. 131 also requires disclosures about
products and services, geographic areas, and major customers. Under SFAS No.
131, we have identified one business segment: fuel cell power plant production
and research.
Enterprise-wide
Information
Enterprise-wide
information provided on geographic revenues is based on the customer’s ordering
location. The following table presents net revenues by country:
|
|
Years
ended October 31, |
|
Revenues: |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
United
States |
|
$ |
23,355 |
|
$ |
25,060 |
|
$ |
36,473 |
|
Germany |
|
|
1,605 |
|
|
3,935 |
|
|
4,183 |
|
Japan |
|
|
6,426 |
|
|
4,795 |
|
|
575 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
31,386 |
|
$ |
33,790 |
|
$ |
41,231 |
|
We
have approximately $0.8 million of long-lived assets in Canada.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Information
about Major Customers
We
contract with a small number of customers for the sales of our products or
research and development contracts. Those customers that accounted for greater
than ten percent of our total net revenues during the three years ended October
31, 2004 are as follows:
|
|
Years
ended
October
31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
U.S.
Government (1) |
|
|
60 |
% |
|
52 |
% |
|
81 |
% |
MTU |
|
|
* |
% |
|
12 |
% |
|
10 |
% |
Marubeni |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
14 |
% |
|
* |
|
* - Less
than 10 percent of total revenues in period.
(1) -
Includes government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S.
Navy either directly or through prime contractors.
Note
14. Employee Benefit Plans
Employee
Savings Plans
The
Capital Accumulation Plan (the “Plan”) for employees of FuelCell Energy, Inc.
was established by us on January 19, 1987 and was last amended in June 2004. A
three-member committee administers the Plan. The Plan is a 401(k) plan covering
our full time employees who have completed and provides for tax-deferred salary
deductions for eligible employees (beginning the first month following an
employee’s hire date). Employees may choose to make voluntary contributions of
their
annual compensation to the Plan, limited to an annual maximum amount as set
periodically by the Internal Revenue Service.
We provide
matching contributions equal to the employee’s deferred compensation, up to a
maximum of 6 percent of the employee’s annual compensation. Participants
are required to contribute a minimum of 3 percent in order to be eligible to
participate and receive a Company match. Company
contributions begin vesting after one year and are fully vested after five
years. Under
the Plan, there is no option available to the employee to receive or purchase
our common stock. We charged $1.1 million, $1.1 million and $0.6 million under
this plan to expense during the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, respectively.
The
FuelCell Energy, Inc. Money Purchase Plan, a defined contribution plan, was
established on May 10, 1976 and was terminated and merged into the Capital
Accumulation Plan effective February 1, 2003. All participant balances were
transferred to the Capital Accumulation Plan. The Money Purchase Plan covered
our full-time employees who completed one year of service. We contributed $0.0
million, $0.2 million and $0.5 million under this plan which was charged to
expense during the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Stock
Option Plans
The
Board adopted the 1988 and 1998 Stock Option Plans (collectively the Plans).
Under the terms of the Plans, options to purchase up to 10,206,000 shares of
common stock may be granted to our officers, key employees and directors.
Pursuant to the Plans, the Board is authorized to grant incentive stock options
or nonqualified options and stock appreciation rights to our officers and key
employees and may grant nonqualified options and stock appreciation rights to
our directors. Stock options and stock appreciation rights have restrictions as
to transferability. The option exercise price shall be fixed by the Board but in
the case of incentive stock options, shall not be less than 100 percent of the
fair market value of the shares subject to the option on the date the option is
granted. Stock appreciation rights may be granted in conjunction with options
granted under the Plans. Stock options that have been granted are generally
exercisable commencing one year after grant at the rate of 25 percent of such
shares in each succeeding year. There were no stock appreciation rights
outstanding at October 31, 2004 and 2003. Costs for fixed awards with pro-rata
vesting are recognized on a straight-line basis.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
The
following table summarizes the Plans' activity for the years ended October 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002:
|
|
Number
of shares |
|
Weighted
average
option
price |
|
Outstanding
at October 31, 2001 |
|
|
4,156,802 |
|
$ |
9.62 |
|
Granted |
|
|
1,283,250 |
|
$ |
12.70 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(213,716 |
) |
$ |
1.55 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(92,750 |
) |
$ |
17.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at October 31, 2002 |
|
|
5,133,586 |
|
$ |
10.57 |
|
Granted |
|
|
655,000 |
|
$ |
6.00 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(165,068 |
) |
$ |
4.86 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(289,252 |
) |
$ |
15.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at October 31, 2003 |
|
|
5,334,266 |
|
$ |
9.94 |
|
Granted
and assumed in acquisitions |
|
|
955,846 |
|
$ |
13.523 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(515,798 |
) |
$ |
5.718 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(420,523 |
) |
$ |
12.224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at October 31, 2004 |
|
|
5,353,791 |
|
|
|
|
The
following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding and
exercisable at October 31, 2004:
|
Options
Outstanding |
Options
Exercisable |
Range
of exercise prices |
Numbers
outstanding |
Weighted
average remaining contractual life |
Weighted
average exercise price |
Number
exercisable |
Weighted
average exercise price |
$0.28
|
- |
$5.10
|
1,742,348 |
3.1 |
$1.67
|
1,738,598 |
$1.67
|
$5.10
|
- |
$9.92
|
815,575 |
7.5 |
$6.26
|
337,820 |
$6.63
|
$9.92
|
- |
$14.74
|
1,487,250 |
7.9 |
$13.47
|
494,375 |
$13.56
|
$14.74
|
- |
$19.56
|
692,618 |
6.2 |
$17.51
|
588,743 |
$17.74
|
$19.56
|
- |
$24.39
|
308,500 |
6.4 |
$23.05
|
235,750 |
$23.07
|
$24.39
|
- |
$29.21
|
28,750 |
6.1 |
$26.09
|
23,750 |
$26.27
|
$29.21
|
- |
$34.03
|
214,750 |
6.0 |
$29.91
|
162,000 |
$29.91
|
$34.03
|
- |
$43.67
|
60,000 |
5.9 |
$38.00
|
60,000 |
$38.00
|
$43.67
|
- |
$48.49
|
4,000 |
6.0 |
$45.97
|
4,000 |
$45.97
|
|
|
|
5,353,791 |
5.9 |
$
10.63 |
3,645,036 |
$9.79
|
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
Our
shareholders adopted a Section 423 Stock Purchase Plan (the “ESPP”) on April
30, 1993, which has been amended from time to time by the Board. The total
shares allocated to the ESPP are 900,000. Under the ESPP, eligible employees
have the right to subscribe to purchase shares of common stock at the lesser of
85 percent of the high and low market prices on the first day of the purchase
period or the last day of the purchase period. As of October 31, 2004, there
were 431,738 shares of Common Stock reserved for issuance under the ESPP. These
shares may be adjusted for any future stock splits. As of October 31, 2004, we
had 121 employees enrolled and participating in the ESPP.
Plan
activity for the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, was as
follows:
|
|
Number
of
Shares |
|
Balance
at October 31, 2001 |
|
|
515,788 |
|
Issued
@ $13.29 |
|
|
(6,338 |
) |
Issued
@ $13.47 |
|
|
(9,986 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at October 31, 2002 |
|
|
499,464 |
|
Issued
@ $4.905 |
|
|
(13,855 |
) |
Issued
@ $5.20 |
|
|
(19,765 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at October 31, 2003 |
|
|
465,844 |
|
Issued
@ $5.338 |
|
|
(22,560 |
) |
Issued
@ $13.77 |
|
|
(11,546 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at October 31, 2004 |
|
|
431,738 |
|
SFAS
No. 123 Assumptions and Fair Value
We
have provided pro forma disclosures in Note 1 of these Notes to the
Consolidated Financial Statements of the effect on net loss and loss per share
as if the fair value method of accounting for stock compensation had been used
for our employee stock option grants and employee stock purchase plan purchases.
These pro forma effects have been estimated at the date of grant and beginning
of the period, respectively, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with
the following weighted average assumptions:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
Stock Options: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
life (in years) |
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
7.5 |
|
Risk-free
interest rate |
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
4.13 |
% |
|
4.25 |
% |
Volatility |
|
|
66.7 |
% |
|
66.8 |
% |
|
87.6 |
% |
Dividend
yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
0 |
% |
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan Shares: |
|
|
|
Expected
life (in years) |
|
|
.5 |
|
|
.5 |
|
|
.5 |
|
Risk-free
interest rate |
|
|
1.26 |
% |
|
1.26 |
% |
|
2.93 |
% |
Volatility |
|
|
64.3 |
% |
|
69.0 |
% |
|
89.2 |
% |
Dividend
yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
0 |
% |
|
0 |
% |
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
The
following is a summary of weighted average grant date option values generated by
application of the Black-Scholes model:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
Stock Option Plan |
|
$ |
8.94 |
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
$ |
10.24 |
|
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan |
|
$ |
3.47 |
|
$ |
1.68 |
|
$ |
8.41 |
|
Note
15. Income Taxes
The
components of (loss) income from continuing operations before income taxes for
the fiscal years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 are as follows:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States |
|
$ |
(65,740 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
Foreign |
|
|
(21,549 |
) |
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
$ |
(87,289 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
$ |
(48,840 |
) |
The
components of Federal income tax expense (benefit) were as follows for the years
ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(284 |
) |
Foreign |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
--
|
|
|
(284 |
) |
Deferred: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
291 |
|
Foreign |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
income tax expense |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
7 |
|
Franchise
tax expense (income), which is included in administrative and selling expenses,
was $0.5 million, $0.3 million and $(0.1) million for the years ended October
31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
The
reconciliation of the Federal statutory income tax rate to our effective income
tax rate for the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 was as
follows:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statutory
Federal income tax rate |
|
|
(34.0 |
%) |
|
(34.0 |
%) |
|
(34.0 |
%) |
Nondeductible
expenditures |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Other,
net |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Valuation
Allowance |
|
|
34.0 |
% |
|
34.0 |
% |
|
34.0 |
% |
Effective
income tax rate |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
|
0.0 |
% |
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Our
Federal and State deferred tax assets and liabilities consisted of the following
at October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
Deferred
tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation
and benefit accruals |
|
$ |
799 |
|
$ |
895 |
|
$ |
348 |
|
Bad
debt and other reserves |
|
|
387
|
|
|
371
|
|
|
361 |
|
Capital
loss and tax credit carryforwards |
|
|
102
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
140 |
|
Net
Operating Loss |
|
|
64,357
|
|
|
50,926
|
|
|
26,328 |
|
Inventory
reserve |
|
|
5,285
|
|
|
4,202
|
|
|
3,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
deferred tax assets |
|
|
70,840 |
|
|
56,496
|
|
|
30,246 |
|
Valuation
allowance |
|
|
(67,871 |
) |
|
(54,010 |
) |
|
(28,811 |
) |
Deferred
tax assets after
valuation
allowance |
|
|
2,969 |
|
|
2,486
|
|
|
1,435 |
|
Deferred
tax liability: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
depreciation |
|
|
2,969 |
|
|
(2,486 |
) |
|
(1,435 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
deferred tax liability |
|
|
(2,969 |
) |
|
(2,486 |
) |
|
(1,435 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
deferred tax assets (State and Federal) |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
We
continually evaluate our deferred tax assets as to whether it is "more likely
than not" that the deferred tax assets will be realized. In assessing the
realizability of our deferred tax assets, management considers the scheduled
reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income, and tax
planning strategies. Based on the projections for future taxable income over the
periods in which the deferred tax assets are realizable, management believes
that significant uncertainty exists surrounding the recoverability of the
deferred tax assets. As a result, we recorded a full valuation allowance against
our net deferred tax assets. Approximately $2.5 million of the valuation
allowance will reduce additional paid in capital upon subsequent recognition of
any related tax benefits.
At
October 31, 2004, we had available, for Federal and State income tax purposes,
net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $166.9 million and $151.7
million, respectively. The Federal net operating loss carryforwards expire in
varying amounts from 2020 through 2024 while State net operating loss
carryforwards expire in varying amounts from 2005 through 2024.
Certain
transactions involving the Company’s beneficial ownership have occurred in
Fiscal 2004 and prior years which may have resulted in a stock ownership change
for purposes of Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. We
have not yet determined if any of the NOL and credits generated will be subject
to limitation under Section 382. Management is currently reviewing whether or
not an ownership change has occurred.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Note
16. Earnings Per Share
Basic
and diluted earnings per share are calculated using the following
data:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
Weighted
average basic common
shares |
|
|
47,875,342 |
|
|
39,342,345 |
|
|
39,135,256 |
|
Effect
of dilutive securities(1) |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
Weighted
average basic common shares adjusted for diluted calculations
|
|
|
47,875,342 |
|
|
39,342,345 |
|
|
39,135,256 |
|
(1) |
-
We
computed earnings per share without consideration to potentially dilutive
instruments due to the fact that losses incurred would make them
antidilutive. For the three years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
the shares of potentially dilutive (in-the-money) stock
options
were, 3,645,036, 4,063,398 and 2,078,818 respectively.
We also have issued warrants, which vest and expire over time.
These warrants, if dilutive, would be excluded from the calculation of EPS
since their vesting is contingent upon certain future performance
requirements that are not yet probable.
|
Note
17. Commitments and Contingencies
Lease
agreements
We
lease certain computer and office equipment, the Torrington, CT manufacturing
facility, additional manufacturing space in Danbury, CT, and office space in
Pasadena, CA, under operating leases expiring on various dates through 2011.
Rent expense was $1.2 million, $1.2 million and $1.0 million for the fiscal
years ended October 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Aggregate minimum
annual payments under the lease agreements for the years subsequent to October
31, 2004 are as follows;
2005 |
|
$ |
1,328 |
|
2006 |
|
|
876 |
|
2007 |
|
|
876 |
|
2008 |
|
|
773 |
|
2009 |
|
|
773 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
$ |
5,224 |
|
Service
and warranty agreements
Once
a fuel cell is installed at a customer site, the Company generally provides a
one-year warranty period. As we have limited operating experience these costs
are expensed as incurred. In addition, certain customers have agreed to extended
service agreements whereby they will contract with us to provide routine
maintenance, minimum operating levels and warranty on certain parts.
Royalty
agreements
We
have royalty agreements with MTU, Santa Clara and the Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI) pursuant to which we have agreed to pay royalties based upon
certain milestones or events relating to the sale of carbonate fuel cells. We
have accrued approximately $0.3 million of royalty expense under these
agreements. Through October 31, 2004, we have not paid any royalties. In
connection with certain contracts and grants from the United States Department
of Energy (DOE), we have agreed to pay the DOE 10 percent of the annual license
income received from MTU, up to $0.5 million in total. Through 2004, we have
paid the DOE a total of $0.4 million.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Legal
Proceedings
We
are not currently a party to any legal proceedings that, either individually or
taken as a whole, that we believe could materially harm our business, prospects,
results of operations or financial condition.
Note
18. Supplemental Cash Flow Information
The
following represents supplemental cash flow information:
|
|
Year
Ended October 31, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
137 |
|
$ |
128 |
|
$ |
160 |
|
Taxes |
|
$ |
480 |
|
$ |
151 |
|
$ |
218 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock issued in acquisitions |
|
$ |
81,825 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
Capital
lease obligations in connection with property and equipment |
|
$ |
390 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
Capital
lease obligations are grouped with current
and long term portion of long-term debt and other liabilities on the
consolidated balance sheets.
Note
19. Quarterly Information
(Unaudited)
The
following tables contain selected unaudited consolidated statement of operations
data for each quarter of fiscal years 2004 and 2003. We believe that the
following information reflects all normal recurring adjustments necessary for a
fair presentation of the information for the periods presented. The operating
results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected
for any future period.
|
|
First |
|
Second |
|
Third |
|
Fourth |
|
Full |
|
|
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Quarter |
|
Year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended October 31,
2004: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
7,394 |
|
$ |
7,049 |
|
$ |
8,068 |
|
$ |
8,875 |
|
$ |
31,386 |
|
Operating loss |
|
$ |
(29,466 |
) |
$ |
(19,663 |
) |
$ |
(19,226 |
) |
$ |
(21,288 |
) |
$ |
(89,643 |
) |
Net loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(28,518 |
) |
$ |
(19,155 |
) |
$ |
(18,883 |
) |
$ |
(20,784 |
) |
$ |
(87,289 |
) |
Net loss1) |
|
$ |
(27,862 |
) |
$ |
(18,869 |
) |
$ |
(18,928 |
) |
$ |
(20,784 |
) |
$ |
(86,443 |
) |
Loss per basic and diluted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
common share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.60 |
) |
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.39 |
) |
$ |
(0.43 |
) |
$ |
(1.82 |
) |
Discontinued operations |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.39 |
) |
$ |
(0.43 |
) |
$ |
(1.81 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended October 31, 2003: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
10,293 |
|
$ |
8,900 |
|
$ |
7,276 |
|
$ |
7,321 |
|
$ |
33,790 |
|
Operating loss |
|
$ |
(16,976 |
) |
$ |
(22,899 |
) |
$ |
(15,893 |
) |
$ |
(17,800 |
) |
$ |
(73,568 |
) |
Net loss(1) |
|
$ |
(16,026 |
) |
$ |
(20,988 |
) |
$ |
(15,020 |
) |
$ |
(15,380 |
) |
$ |
(67,414 |
) |
Loss per basic and diluted common share: |
|
$ |
(0.41 |
) |
$ |
(0.53 |
) |
$ |
(0.38 |
) |
$ |
(0.39 |
) |
$ |
(1.71 |
) |
(1) - During the year ended October 31, 2004 we acquired and subsequently
sold Global Thermoelectric Inc. As a result, we recognized losses from
discontinued operations related to this entity during fiscal 2004. There were no
losses related to this entity in fiscal 2003.
Note
20. Subsequent Events
Preferred
Share Offering
On
November 11, 2004, FuelCell Energy, Inc. entered into a Purchase Agreement
(“Purchase Agreement”) with Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets
Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc., and Lazard Freres & Co., LLC (the
“Initial Purchasers”) for the private placement under Rule 144A of up to 135,000
shares of 5% Series B Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock
(Liquidation Preference $1,000) (“Series B preferred stock”). On November 17,
2004, the Company closed on the sale of 100,000 shares of Series B preferred
stock to the Initial Purchasers. Net proceeds to the Company were approximately
$93.5 million.
Under
the terms of the Purchase Agreement, the Initial Purchasers have an option
through January 25, 2005 to purchase the remaining 35,000 shares and are
entitled to indemnification from us in certain circumstances.
Sale
of Canadian Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Operation to Versa Power Systems,
Inc.
On
November 1, 2004, pursuant to an asset purchase agreement (the “Agreement”),
dated October 19, 2004, by and among FuelCell Energy, Inc. (“FuelCell”), its
wholly-owned Canadian subsidiary, FuelCell Energy, Ltd., Versa Power Systems,
Inc. (Versa), a Delaware corporation, and Versa Power Systems, Ltd., a Canadian
corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of Versa Power Systems, Inc., FuelCell
Energy, Ltd. transferred substantially all of its solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC)
assets and operations (including manufacturing and test equipment, intellectual
property and personnel) to Versa Power Systems, Ltd. In exchange, FuelCell
received 5,714 shares of Versa Power Systems, Inc. common stock, increasing
FuelCell’s ownership position in Versa to 7,714 shares, or 42 percent. No cash
was exchanged in the transaction. The consideration received by FuelCell in the
transaction was determined based upon arms-length negotiations of the
parties.
Pursuant
to the terms of the transaction, we expect to incur cash costs in the range of
approximately $1.0 million to $1.5 million related to severance and facility
consolidations in Calgary, Canada. Approximately
$0.1 million of this amount is related to severance payments to
employees paid
during the quarter ended October 31, 2004. The remaining payments are expected
to be made during fiscal year 2005. In
addition, we have
committed to paying future severance costs for time and service accrued up to
November 1, 2004 by employees that are moving to Versa in the event that they
are terminated by Versa
Power Systems, Ltd. (or its parent). Our liability for such severance costs is
limited to the
period commencing on November 1, 2004 through the earlier of (1) award of Phase
2 of the SECA
program
to FuelCell, (2) one year after completion of Phase 1 of the SECA program, or
(3) February 26, 2008. Subsequent to this period, Versa
Power Systems, Ltd. (or its parent) will be
responsible for the severance liability for such employees. We estimate this
liability at approximately $0.8 million.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
For
the years ended October 31, 2004, 2003, and 2002
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Assets
sold to Versa totaled approximately $12.4 million and were classified as held
for sale on the consolidated balance sheet as of October 31, 2004. Upon closing
on November 1, 2004, our total investment in Versa was approximately $14.4
million and will be classified as “Equity investments” in subsequent periods. We
will account for this investment under the equity method in future
periods.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
January 31,
2005
(Unaudited) |
|
October 31,
2004 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
$ |
168,744 |
|
$ |
45,759 |
|
Investments:
U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
51,694 |
|
|
106,636 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net |
|
|
|
|
|
7,721 |
|
|
7,599 |
|
Inventories,
net |
|
|
|
|
|
13,285 |
|
|
14,619 |
|
Other
current assets, net |
|
|
|
|
|
4,007 |
|
|
4,253 |
|
Total
current assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
245,451 |
|
$ |
178,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
41,892 |
|
|
42,254 |
|
Investments:
long-term U.S. treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
10,999 |
|
|
-- |
|
Assets
held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
12,344 |
|
Equity
Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
13,685 |
|
|
2,125 |
|
Other
assets, net |
|
|
|
|
|
673 |
|
|
921 |
|
Total
assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
312,700 |
|
$ |
236,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
$ |
562 |
|
$ |
539 |
|
Accounts
payable |
|
|
|
|
|
5,835 |
|
|
9,526 |
|
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
6,288 |
|
|
5,255 |
|
Deferred
license fee income |
|
|
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
37 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
5,700 |
|
|
6,713 |
|
Total
current liabilities |
|
|
|
|
$ |
18,648 |
|
$ |
22,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
1,476 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
|
|
$ |
19,865 |
|
$ |
23,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders’
equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock ($0.01 par value); 200,000 shares authorized at January 31, 2005 and
October 31, 2004: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series
B Convertible Preferred Stock; 105,875 shares issued and outstanding at
January 31, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
-- |
|
Common
stock ($.0001 par value); 150,000,000 shares authorized and 48,163,474 and
48,132,694 shares issued and outstanding at January 31, 2005 and October
31, 2004, respectively |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
5
|
|
Preferred
shares of subsidiary |
|
|
|
|
|
10,181 |
|
|
10,259 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital |
|
|
|
|
|
522,825 |
|
|
424,621 |
|
Accumulated
deficit |
|
|
|
|
|
(240,177 |
) |
|
(221,921 |
) |
Total
shareholders’ equity |
|
|
|
|
$ |
292,835 |
|
$ |
212,964 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity |
|
|
|
|
$ |
312,700 |
|
$ |
236,510 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
(Dollars
in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
sales and revenues |
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,032 |
|
$ |
2,028 |
|
Research
and development contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
2,522 |
|
|
5,366 |
|
Total
revenues |
|
|
|
|
$ |
7,554 |
|
$ |
7,394 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of product sales and revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
13,713 |
|
|
7,623 |
|
Cost
of research and development contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
2,814 |
|
|
7,471 |
|
Administrative
and selling expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
3,130 |
|
|
3,701 |
|
Purchased
in-process research and development |
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
12,200 |
|
Research
and development expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
5,233 |
|
|
5,865 |
|
Total
costs and expenses |
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,890 |
|
$ |
36,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
from operations |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(17,336 |
) |
$ |
(29,466 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License
fee income, net |
|
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
67 |
|
Interest
expense |
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
(37 |
) |
Loss
from equity investments |
|
|
|
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
-- |
|
Interest
and other income, net |
|
|
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
918 |
|
Net
loss from continuing operations before provision for income
tax |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(16,772 |
) |
$ |
(28,518 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss from continuing operations |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(16,772 |
) |
$ |
(28,518 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
(1,252 |
) |
|
656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(18,024 |
) |
$ |
(27,862 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
(1,342 |
) |
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(19,366 |
) |
$ |
(28,102 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share basic and diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.37 |
) |
$ |
(0.60 |
) |
Discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
0.01 |
|
Net
loss to common shareholders |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
Basic
and diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
48,152,998 |
|
|
47,368,764 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited)
(Dollars
in thousands)
|
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Cash
flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(18,024 |
) |
$ |
(27,862 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash used in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operating
activities, net of effects of acquisition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Income)/loss
from discontinued operations |
|
|
1,252 |
|
|
(656 |
) |
Asset
impairment |
|
|
994 |
|
|
-- |
|
Loss
in equity investments |
|
|
340 |
|
|
-- |
|
Purchased
in process research and development |
|
|
-- |
|
|
12,200 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization |
|
|
1,897 |
|
|
2,569 |
|
Loss
on disposal of assets |
|
|
-- |
|
|
6 |
|
Provision
for doubtful accounts |
|
|
6 |
|
|
(10 |
) |
(Increase)
decrease in operating assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable |
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
(2,577 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
1,336 |
|
|
1,377 |
|
Other
current assets |
|
|
491 |
|
|
3,201 |
|
Increase
(decrease) in operating liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable |
|
|
(3,691 |
) |
|
(8,374 |
) |
Accrued
liabilities |
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
3,548 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
|
(1,013 |
) |
|
2,899 |
|
Deferred
license fee income and other |
|
|
225 |
|
|
225 |
|
Net
cash used in operating activities |
|
$ |
(16,735 |
) |
$ |
(13,454 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures |
|
|
(3,264 |
) |
|
(752 |
) |
Treasury
notes matured |
|
|
59,253 |
|
|
11,353 |
|
Treasury
notes purchased |
|
|
(15,354 |
) |
|
(9,249 |
) |
Cash
acquired from acquisition of Global Thermoelectric,
Inc., net of transaction costs |
|
|
-- |
|
|
53,029 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
$ |
40,635 |
|
$ |
54,381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment
on long-term debt |
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
(76 |
) |
Net
proceeds from issuance of preferred stock |
|
|
99,007 |
|
|
-- |
|
Common
stock issued for Option and Stock Purchase Plans |
|
|
161 |
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by financing activities |
|
$ |
99,084 |
|
$ |
813 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Cash provided by discontinued operations |
|
|
-- |
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
122,984 |
|
$ |
41,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents-beginning of period |
|
|
45,759 |
|
|
41,000 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents-end of period |
|
$ |
168,743 |
|
$ |
82,940 |
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Nature
of Business
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. is engaged in the development and commercialization of carbonate
fuel cell technology for stationary power generation. We manufacture carbonate
fuel cells, generally on a contract basis. We are currently in the process of
commercializing our Direct FuelCell technology and expect to incur losses as we
expand our product development, commercialization program and manufacturing
operations.
Basis
of Presentation - Interim Consolidated Financial Statements
The
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America, for interim financial information, and with the instructions to Form
10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not contain all of
the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally
accepted for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all
adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) necessary to present
fairly our financial position as of January 31, 2005 have been included. The
balance sheet as of October 31, 2004 has been derived from the audited financial
statements at that date.
The
results of operations and cash flows for the three months ended January 31, 2005
are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.
The reader should supplement the information in this document with prior
disclosures in our 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Consolidation
The
consolidated financial statements include our accounts and those of our
subsidiaries. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
Alliance Monterrey, LLC and Alliance Chico, LLC are joint ventures with Alliance
Power, Inc. to construct fuel cell power plants and sell power under power
purchase agreements with the City of Santa Barbara and the Sierra Nevada Brewery
Co. The financial results of the joint ventures were consolidated with those of
FuelCell, which owns 80 percent of each entity.
Certain
reclassifications have been made to our prior year amounts to conform to the
2005 presentation.
Foreign
Currency Translation
Our
Canadian subsidiary, FuelCell Energy, Ltd. is financially and operationally
integrated and therefore the temporal method of translation of foreign
currencies is followed. Under the temporal method, foreign currency gains or
losses are recorded on the statement of operations. The functional currency is
U.S. dollars. As of November 1, 2004, all Canadian business operations were
transferred to Versa Power Systems, Inc. (refer to Note 2 - Discontinued
Operations and Sale of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Assets) but we do retain the legal
entity in Canada with certain monetary balances (primarily cash). We recognized
approximately $0.03 million in foreign currency loss and $0.3 million in foreign
currency gain during the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. These amounts have been classified in interest and other income on
our consolidated statement of operations.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Stock-Based
Compensation
Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No. 123, "Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation”, encourages entities to recognize the fair value of all
stock-based awards on the date of grant as expense over the vesting period.
Alternatively, SFAS No. 123 allows entities to continue to apply the intrinsic
value method provisions of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25
and provide pro forma net income and pro forma earnings per share disclosures
for employees’ stock option grants as if the fair-value-based method defined in
SFAS No. 123 had been applied. We apply the pro forma disclosure provisions of
SFAS No. 123. Accordingly, no compensation expense was recorded in the statement
of operations. The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net
loss per basic and diluted share as if we had applied the fair value method to
our stock-based compensation, as required under the disclosure provisions of
SFAS No. 123:
|
|
Three
Months Ended January 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
loss to common shareholders, as reported |
|
$ |
(19,366 |
) |
$ |
(28,102 |
) |
Less:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under the fair
value method for all awards |
|
|
(1,625 |
) |
|
(2,238 |
) |
Pro
forma net loss to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(20,991 |
) |
$ |
(30,340 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per basic and diluted common share to common shareholders, as
reported |
|
$ |
(0.40 |
) |
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
Pro
forma loss per basic and diluted common share to common
shareholders |
|
$ |
(0.44 |
) |
$ |
(0.64 |
) |
These
pro forma amounts may not be representative of future disclosures since the
estimated fair value of stock options is amortized to expense over the vesting
period, and additional options may be granted in future years. The pro forma
amounts assume that the corporation had been following the fair value approach
since the beginning.
Comprehensive
Loss
Comprehensive
loss totaled $(18,256) for the three months January 31, 2005. Comprehensive loss
included an adjustment to retained earnings totaling approximately $0.2 million
as a result from switching from the cost to equity method of accounting for our
investment in Versa Power, Ltd. Refer also to Note 3 - Equity
Investments.
Comprehensive
loss totaled $(27,862) for the three months ended January 31, 2004.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 123 (revised 2004)
(“SFAS No. 123R”), “Share-Based Payment” which revised SFAS No. 123, “Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation. This statement supercedes APB Opinion No. 25,
“Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” The revised statement addresses the
accounting for share-based payment transactions with employees and other third
parties, eliminates the ability to account for share-based compensation
transactions using APB 25 and requires that the compensation costs relating to
such transactions be recognized in the consolidated statement of operations. The
revised statement is effective as of the first interim period beginning after
June 15, 2005. We are currently evaluating the provisions of SFAS No. 123R and
will adopt it on August 1, 2005 as required.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
In
November 2004, the FASB ratified the consensus reached by the Emerging Issues
Task Force (“EITF”), on Issue No. 03-13, “Applying the Conditions in Paragraph
42 of FASB Statement No. 144 in Determining Whether to Report Discontinued
Operations”. The Issue provides a model to assist in evaluating (a) which cash
flows should be considered in the determination of whether cash flows of the
disposal component have been or will be eliminated from the ongoing operations
of the entity and (b) the types of continuing involvement that constitute
significant continuing involvement in the operations of the disposal component.
Should significant continuing ongoing involvement exist, then the disposal
component shall be reported in the results of continuing operations on the
consolidated statements of operations and cash flows. We applied the provisions
of this accounting standard to our financial statements.
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs,” which
amends the guidance in ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory Pricing,” to
clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight,
handling costs, and wasted material. This Statement requires that those items be
recognized as current-period charges regardless of whether they meet the
criterion of “so abnormal.” In addition, this Statement requires that allocation
of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the normal
capacity of the production facilities. We are currently evaluating the
provisions of SFAS No. 151 and will adopt it on November 1, 2005,
as required.
Note
2. Discontinued Operations and Sale of Solid Oxide Fuel
Cell Assets
. |
During
fiscal 2004, we acquired, Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global) and
subsequently divested its generator business unit through the sale of
Global on May 28, 2004. The following table represents the results of
discontinued operations, net of related income taxes:
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended January 31, |
|
|
|
|
2005(1) |
|
|
2004(2) |
|
Product
sales and revenues |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
5,945 |
|
Cost
of product sales |
|
|
-- |
|
|
4,354 |
|
Asset
impairments and facility exit costs |
|
|
1,252 |
|
|
-- |
|
Operating
expenses |
|
|
-- |
|
|
764 |
|
Operating
income / (loss) |
|
$ |
(1,252 |
) |
$ |
827 |
|
Provision
for income taxes |
|
|
-- |
|
|
171 |
|
Discontinued
operations, net of tax |
|
$ |
(1,252 |
) |
$ |
656 |
|
(1) |
During
the three months ended January 31, 2005 we exited certain facilities in
Canada and as a result recorded fixed asset impairment charges totaling
approximately $0.9 million. In addition, we incurred approximately $0.4
million of exit costs related to these facilities which resulted in total
loss from discontinued operations of approximately $1.3
million. |
(2) |
During
fiscal 2004, we acquired Global Thermoelectric Inc. (Global) and
subsequently divested its generator business unit through the sale of
Global on May 28, 2004. As a result, historical results were reclassified
as discontinued operations. Income, net of taxes related to the generator
business totaled approximately $0.7 million for the three months ended
January 31, 2004. |
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Sale
of Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Assets
On
October 19, 2004, we signed a definitive agreement to transfer substantially all
of our Canadian SOFC assets and operations (including manufacturing and test
equipment, intellectual property and personnel) to Versa Power Systems, Ltd.
This transaction closed on November 1, 2004. In exchange, we received 5,714
shares of Versa Power Systems, Inc. common stock, increasing our ownership
position in Versa to 7,714 shares, or 42 percent. No cash was exchanged in the
transaction. The consideration received by us in the transaction was determined
based upon arms-length negotiations of the parties.
The
following assets and liabilities of the SOFC operation were
divested:
Assets |
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
7,429 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
4,816 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
39 |
|
Total
assets sold |
|
$ |
12,284 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long
term debt sold |
|
$ |
152 |
|
As
defined by EITF Issue 03-13, we will have an ongoing significant involvement in
SOFC Operation given our 42 percent ownership interest. Therefore, the fiscal
2004 results of the Canadian SOFC operation have been reported as continuing
operations in the consolidated statements of operations and cash
flows.
Note
3. Equity investments
Equity
investments include our investment in Versa Power Systems, Inc., totaling
approximately $13.6 million and $2.0 million as of January 31, 2005 and as of
October 31, 2004, respectively. We began accounting for this investment under
the equity method of accounting as of November 1, 2004, at which time our
ownership had increased from 16 percent to 42 percent.
With
the change from the cost to the equity method of accounting, we recorded an
adjustment of $0.2 million to accumulated deficit to account for our share of
the historical losses in this entity assuming the Company had always been under
the equity method. Our share of equity losses for the three months ended January
31, 2005, totaled $0.3 million.
We
also have a 25 percent ownership interest in Xiamen Technology Co. Ltd., valued
at approximately $0.1 million which is accounted for under the equity method of
accounting.
Note
4. Investments in U.S. treasury securities
Our
short and long-term investments are in U.S. treasury securities, which are held
to maturity. The following table summarizes the amortized cost basis and fair
value at January 31, 2005 and October 31, 2004:
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Amortized
Cost |
|
Gross
Unrealized
Gains |
|
Gross
Unrealized
(Losses) |
|
Fair
Value |
|
At
January 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government obligations |
|
$ |
62,693 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(163 |
) |
$ |
62,530 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
October 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government obligations |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
(190 |
) |
$ |
(106,446 |
) |
Reported
as:
|
|
January
31, |
|
October
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Short-term
investments |
|
$ |
51,694 |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
Long-term
investments |
|
|
10,999 |
|
|
-- |
|
Total |
|
$ |
62,693 |
|
$ |
106,636 |
|
Short-term
investments securities have maturity dates ranging from February 28, 2005 to
January 31, 2006, and estimated yields ranging from 1.11 percent to 2.69
percent. Long-term investments securities have maturity dates ranging from
February 28, 2006 to May 31, 2006, and estimated yields ranging from 2.25
percent to 2.86 percent. Our weighted average yield on our short and long-term
investments was 2.03 percent as of January 31, 2005.
Note
5. Inventories
The
components of inventory at January 31, 2005 and October 31, 2004 consisted of
the following:
|
|
January
31, |
|
October
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw
materials |
|
$ |
595 |
|
$ |
1,663 |
|
Work-in-process
and finished goods |
|
|
12,690 |
|
|
12,956 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
13,285 |
|
$ |
14,619 |
|
Our
inventories are stated at the lower of recoverable cost or market price. We
provide for a lower of cost or market (LCM) adjustment against gross inventory
values. Our LCM adjustment, reducing gross inventory values to the reported
amounts, was approximately $7.7 million and $11.3 million at January 31, 2005
and October 31, 2004, respectively.
Note
6. Property, Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment at January 31, 2005 and October 31, 2004 consisted of the
following:
|
|
January
31, 2005 |
|
October
31, 2004 |
|
Estimated
Useful Life |
|
Land |
|
$ |
524 |
|
$ |
524 |
|
|
— |
|
Building
and improvements |
|
|
5,891 |
|
|
6,824 |
|
|
10-30
years |
|
Machinery,
equipment and software |
|
|
47,665 |
|
|
48,576 |
|
|
3-8
years |
|
Furniture
and fixtures |
|
|
2,210 |
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
6-10
years |
|
Assets
available for lease(1) |
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
3
years |
|
Construction
in progress(2) |
|
|
9,802 |
|
|
6,645 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
68,155 |
|
$ |
66,849 |
|
|
|
|
Less,
accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(26,263 |
) |
|
(24,595 |
) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
41,892 |
|
$ |
42,254 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
-
Assets available for lease are two DFC 300 power plants which we have
designated available for lease. One of these assets is currently under
lease to a customer and another is on loan to a government test
facility. |
(2) |
-
Included in construction in progress are costs to build power plants,
which will service power purchase agreement (PPA) contracts. These plants
are being constructed by joint ventures, we are a 80 percent owner and, as
a result, consolidated on our financial
statements. |
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Depreciation
expense was approximately $1.8 million and $2.5 million for the three months
ended January 31, 2005 and
2004,
respectively.
During
the three months ended January 31, 2005 we recorded a fixed asset impairment
charge related to an obsolete catalyst extruding system totaling $0.9 million,
against cost of product sales. This was related to a planned change in
manufacturing processes that is expected to improve product performance and
reduce costs in future periods. In addition, during the three months ended
January 31, 2005 we recorded a fixed asset impairment charge to discontinued
operations totaling $0.9 million related to excess facilities in Calgary,
Alberta, Canada.
Note
7. Shareholders' Equity
Changes
in shareholders’ equity
Changes
in shareholders’ equity were as follows for the quarter ended January 31,
2005:
Balance
at October 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
212,964 |
|
Issuance
of Series B Preferred shares |
|
|
99,007 |
|
Accretion
of fair value discount of preferred stock |
|
|
300 |
|
Reduction
of additional paid in capital for accretion of discount |
|
|
(300 |
) |
Series
B preferred dividends accrued |
|
|
(1,041 |
) |
Proceeds
from sales of shares through employee stock plans |
|
|
161 |
|
Equity
method losses in Versa Power Systems, Inc.(1) |
|
|
(232 |
) |
Net
loss |
|
|
(18,024 |
) |
Balance
at January 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
292,835 |
|
(1) With
an increase of ownership in Versa Power Systems, Inc. to 42 percent, we now
account for our investment under the equity method of accounting. As a result,
we recorded a $0.2 million adjustment against retained earnings to record
historical losses as if the investment had been accounted for under the equity
method since our original investment in fiscal 2002.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share
amounts)
Series
B Preferred Shares
On
November 11, 2004, we entered into a purchase agreement with Citigroup Global
Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc., and Lazard
Freres & Co., LLC (the “Initial Purchasers”) for the private placement under
Rule 144A of up to 135,000 shares of our 5% Series B Cumulative Convertible
Perpetual Preferred Stock (Liquidation Preference $1,000). On November 17, 2004,
we closed on the sale of 100,000 shares of Series B preferred stock to the
Initial Purchasers. Net proceeds to us were approximately $93.5 million.
Under
the terms of the purchase
agreement,
the Initial Purchasers had an option through January 25, 2005 to purchase the
remaining 35,000 shares and are entitled to indemnification from us in certain
circumstances. On January 18, 2005, we closed on the sale of 5,875 shares of
Series B preferred stock to the Initial Purchasers. Net proceeds to us were
approximately $5.5 million.
The
following is a summary of certain provisions of our Series B preferred stock.
The shares of our Series B preferred stock and the shares of our common stock
issuable upon conversion of the shares of our Series B preferred stock are
covered by a registration rights agreement.
Ranking
Shares
of our Series B preferred stock rank with respect to dividend rights and rights
upon liquidation, winding up or dissolution:
· senior
to shares of our common stock;
· junior
to our debt obligations; and
· effectively
junior to our subsidiaries' (i) existing and future liabilities and (ii) capital
stock held by others.
Dividends
The
Series B preferred stock pays cumulative annual dividends of $50 per share which
are payable quarterly in arrears on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November
15, commencing February 15, 2005, when, as and if declared by the board of
directors. Dividends will be paid on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of
twelve 30-day months. Dividends on the shares of our Series B preferred stock
will accumulate and be cumulative from the date of original issuance.
Accumulated dividends on the shares of our Series B preferred stock will not
bear any interest.
We
may pay dividends on the Series B preferred stock:
· in
cash;
· at
the option of the holder, in shares of our common stock, which will be
registered pursuant to a registration statement to allow for the immediate sale
of these common shares in the public market; or
· any
combination thereof.
Liquidation
The
Series B preferred stock has a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. Upon
any voluntary or involuntary liquidation, dissolution or winding up of our
company resulting in a distribution of assets to the holders of any class or
series of our capital stock, each holder of shares of our Series B preferred
stock will be entitled to payment out of our assets available for distribution
of an amount equal to the liquidation preference per share of Series B preferred
stock held by that holder, plus all accumulated and unpaid dividends on those
shares to the date of that liquidation, dissolution, or winding up, before any
distribution is made on any junior shares, including shares of our common stock,
but after any distributions on any of our indebtedness or senior shares (if
any). After payment in full of the liquidation preference and all accumulated
and unpaid dividends to which holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock
are entitled, holders of shares of our Series B preferred stock will not be
entitled to any further participation in any distribution of our assets.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Conversion
A
share of our Series B preferred stock may be converted at any time, at the
option of the holder, into 85.1064 shares of our common stock (which is
equivalent to an initial conversion price of $11.75 per share) plus cash in lieu
of fractional shares. The conversion rate is subject to adjustment upon the
occurrence of certain events, as described below, but will not be adjusted for
accumulated and unpaid dividends. Upon conversion, holders of Series B preferred
stock will not receive a cash payment for any accumulated dividends. Instead,
accumulated dividends, if any, will be cancelled.
On
or after November 20, 2009 we may, at our option, cause shares of our Series B
preferred stock to be automatically converted into that number of shares of our
common stock that are issuable at the then prevailing conversion rate. We may
exercise our conversion right only if the closing price of our common stock
exceeds 150% of the then prevailing conversion price for 20 trading days during
any consecutive 30 trading day period, as described in the certificate of
designation,
as amended,
for the Series B preferred stock.
If
there is a fundamental change in the ownership or control of FuelCell (as
described in the certificate of designation,
as amended),
holders of our Series B preferred stock may require us to purchase all or part
of their shares at a redemption price equal to 100% of the liquidation
preference of the shares of our Series B preferred stock to be repurchased, plus
accrued and unpaid dividends, if any, in the manner set forth in the certificate
of designation,
as amended.
Voting
Holders
of shares of our Series B preferred stock have no voting rights unless (1)
dividends on any shares of our Series B preferred stock or any other class or
series of stock ranking on a parity with the shares of our Series B preferred
stock with respect to the payment of dividends shall be in arrears for dividend
periods, whether or not consecutive, containing in the aggregate a number of
days equivalent to six calendar quarters or (2) we fail to pay the repurchase
price, plus accrued and unpaid dividends, if any, on the fundamental change
repurchase date for shares of our Series B preferred stock following a
fundamental change (as described in the certificate of designation,
as amended, for
the Series B preferred stock).
Preferred
shares of subsidiary
In
conjunction with our acquisition of Global, we assumed the preferred share
obligation comprised of 1,000,000 Series 2 non-voting Preferred Shares. With the
sale of the Global entity in May of 2004, the Global Series 2 Preferred Shares
were cancelled, and replaced with substantially equivalent Series 1 Preferred
Shares (Preferred Shares) issued by FuelCell Energy, Ltd. The Preferred Shares
are convertible at the option of the holder into a number of our common shares
based on the fraction by which their face value of Cdn.$25.00 is of the
conversion prices (in Canadian dollars) identified below:
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Period
of conversion |
|
Conversion
price per share of FuelCell common stock in Canadian
Dollars(1) |
|
Conversion
price per share of FuelCell common stock
in
U.S. Dollars (1)
(2) |
To
July 31, 2005 |
|
Cdn.$110.97 |
|
$
84.34 |
August
1, 2005 to July 31, 2010 |
|
Cdn.$120.22 |
|
$
91.31 |
August
1, 2010 to July 31, 2015 |
|
Cdn.$129.46 |
|
$
98.39 |
August
1, 2015 to July 31, 2020 |
|
Cdn.$138.71 |
|
$
105.42 |
After
July 31, 2020 |
|
95%
of the market trading price of FuelCell’s common stock at the time of
conversion (expressed in Canadian dollars) |
|
95%
of the market trading price of FuelCell’s common stock at the time of
conversion |
(1) |
The
foregoing “conversion prices” are subject to adjustment for certain
subsequent events. |
(2) |
While
the conversion of preferred shares is based on the prices of our common
stock expressed in Canadian dollars, we have provided this example of
conversion prices in U.S. dollars assuming a constant exchange rate of
0.76 U.S. dollars to 1.00 Canadian dollar (which was the exchange rate at
the date of acquisition). The conversion price in U.S. dollars will
increase or decrease over time as currency rates
fluctuate. |
Quarterly
dividends of Cdn.$312,500 accrue on the Preferred Shares (subject to possible
reduction pursuant to the terms of the Preferred Shares on account of increases
in the price of our common stock). We have agreed to pay a minimum of
Cdn.$500,000 in cash or common stock annually to Enbridge Inc., the holder of
the Preferred Shares, so long as Enbridge holds the shares. Interest accrues on
cumulative unpaid dividends at a 2.45 percent quarterly rate, compounded
quarterly, until payment thereof. All cumulative unpaid dividends must be paid
by December 31, 2010. From 2010 through 2020, we would be required to pay annual
dividend amounts totaling Cdn.$1.25 million. During the year ended October 31,
2004, we paid cash dividends totaling Cdn. $500,000 to Enbridge.
The
Preferred Shares may be redeemed by us, in whole or part, if on the day that the
notice of redemption is first given, the volume-weighted average price at which
our common shares are traded is at least a 20 percent premium to the current
conversion price on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Preferred Share to be redeemed,
together with an amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends to the date
fixed for redemption. On or after July 31, 2010, the Preferred Shares are
redeemable at any time on payment of Cdn.$25.00 per Preferred Share to be
redeemed together with an amount equal to all accrued and unpaid dividends to
the date fixed for redemption.
As
of the November 3, 2003 acquisition date of Global, the fair value of the
Preferred Shares was determined to be $9.1 million. The fair value of the
Preferred Shares is adjusted quarterly to reflect dividend payments and
accretion of the fair value discount. As of January 31, 2005, this was valued at
$10.2 million.
Warrants
On
April 6, 2004, we issued warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of our common
stock to Marubeni Corporation (Marubeni) in conjunction with a revised
distribution agreement. Pursuant to the terms of this agreement, Marubeni placed
orders for 4 megawatts of DFC power plants, and committed to creating a
sub-distributor network and to provide additional support for our products. All
previously issued warrants to Marubeni were cancelled. As part of the new
warrant agreements, the warrants vest in separate tranches once Marubeni has
ordered totals of between 5 MW and 45 MW of our products. The exercise prices of
the warrants range from $13.78 to $18.73 per share and the warrants will expire
between April 2005 and April 2007, if not exercised sooner.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Concurrent
with the April 6, 2004 agreement, the first tranche of 200,000 warrants vested.
The fair value of these warrants was determined to be $0.5 million. This has
been recorded as other current assets on the consolidated balance sheet with the
offsetting entry to additional paid in capital. In accordance with our warrant
value recognition policy, a proportional amount of the fair value of the
warrants will be recorded against the revenue, when recognized, as a sales
discount. To date, discounts of approximately $0.1 million have been recognized
against revenue. As of January 31, 2005, these warrants had not been
exercised.
Note
8. Segment Information and Major Customers
Under
SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information,” we use the “management” approach to reporting segments. The
management approach designates the internal organization that is used by
management for making operating decisions and assessing performance as the
source of reportable segments. SFAS No. 131 also requires disclosures about
products and services, geographic areas, and major customers. Under SFAS No.
131, we have identified one business segment: fuel cell power plant production
and research.
Enterprise-wide
Information
Enterprise-wide
information provided on geographic revenues is based on the customer’s ordering
location. The following table presents revenues (greater than ten percent of our
total revenues):
|
|
|
Three
months ended
January
31, |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
United
States |
|
$ |
4,795 |
|
$ |
6,719 |
|
Germany |
|
|
1,450 |
|
|
* |
|
Japan |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
* |
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,554 |
|
$ |
7,394 |
|
* - Less
than ten percent of total revenues in period.
Information
about Major Customers
We
contract with a small number of customers for the sales of our products or
research and development contracts. Those customers that accounted for greater
than ten percent of our total revenues during the three months ended January 31,
2005 and 2004 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
Three
months endedJanuary
31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
U.S.
Government (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
% |
|
73
|
% |
MTU
CFC Solutions, GmbH |
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
% |
|
* |
% |
Chevron
Energy Solutions |
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
% |
|
* |
|
Marubeni,
Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
* |
|
Caterpillar,
Inc |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
|
10 |
% |
* - Less than ten percent of total revenues in period.
(1) -
Includes government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S.
Navy either directly or through prime contractors.
FUELCELL
ENERGY, INC.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
For
the three months ended January 31, 2005 and 2004
(Tabular
amounts in thousands, except share and per share amounts)
Note
9. Earnings Per Share
Basic
and diluted earnings per share are calculated using the following
data:
|
|
Three
months ended
January
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Weighted
average basic common
shares |
|
|
48,152,998 |
|
|
47,368,764 |
|
Effect
of dilutive securities(1) |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Weighted
average basic common shares adjusted for
diluted calculations |
|
|
48,152,998 |
|
|
47,368,764 |
|
(1) |
We
computed earnings per share without consideration to potentially dilutive
instruments due to the fact that the losses incurred would make them
antidilutive. For the three months ended January 31, 2005, and 2004 the
shares of potentially dilutive (in-the-money) stock options
were 5,234,778 and 3,110,898, respectively.
We also have issued warrants, which vest and expire over time.
These warrants, if dilutive, would be excluded from the calculation of EPS
since their vesting is contingent upon certain future performance
requirements that are not yet probable. The Company also has convertible
preferred stock outstanding which has also been excluded from this
calculation as the effect would be antidilutive. |
Note
10. Supplemental Cash Flow Information
The
following represents supplemental cash flow information:
|
|
Three
Months Ended
January
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Cash
paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
42 |
|
$ |
37 |
|
Taxes |
|
$ |
72 |
|
$ |
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock issued in acquisitions |
|
$ |
-- |
|
$ |
81,825 |
|
Assets
and liabilities, net, invested in Versa Power Systems,
Inc. |
|
$ |
12,132 |
|
$ |
-- |
|
[LOGO]
1,800,000
Shares of Common Stock
______________
PROSPECTUS
APRIL
[__], 2005
PART
II
INFORMATION
NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS
Item
13. Other Expenses of Issuance and Distribution.
The
following table sets forth all expenses payable by us in connection with the
offering of the securities being registered. All such expenses are being borne
by us.
SEC
Registration Fee |
|
$ |
1,885.55 |
|
Accounting
Fees and Expenses* |
|
$ |
25,000.00 |
|
Legal
Fees and Expenses* |
|
$ |
75,000.00 |
|
Miscellaneous
Expenses* |
|
$ |
18,114.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total* |
|
$ |
120,000.00 |
|
*
Estimated.
Item
14. Indemnification of Directors and Officers
Section
145 of the Delaware General Corporation Law provides that a corporation may
indemnify any person, including an officer and director, who was or is, or is
threatened to be made, a party to any threatened, pending or completed action,
suit or proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative
(other than an action by or in the right of such corporation), by reason of the
fact that such person is or was a director, officer, employee or agent of such
corporation, or is or was serving at the request of such corporation as a
director, officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint
venture, trust or other enterprise. The indemnity may include expenses
(including attorneys’ fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement
actually and reasonably incurred by such person in connection with such action,
suit or proceeding, provided such person acted in good faith and in a manner
such person reasonably believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of
such corporation, and, with respect to any criminal actions and proceedings, had
no reasonable cause to believe that his conduct was unlawful. A Delaware
corporation may indemnify any person, including an officer or director, who was
or is, or is threatened to be made, a party to any threatened, pending or
contemplated action or suit by or in the right of such corporation, under the
same conditions, except that no indemnification is permitted without judicial
approval if such person is adjudged to be liable to such corporation.
Where an officer or director of a corporation is successful, on the merits
or otherwise, in the defense of any action, suit or proceeding referred to
above, or any claim, issue or matter herein, the corporation must indemnify such
person against the expenses (including attorneys’ fees) which such officer or
director actually and reasonably incurred in connection therewith.
Our
certificate of incorporation provides that none of our directors will be
personally liable to us or our shareholders for monetary damages for breach of
fiduciary duty as a director, except to the extent such exemption from liability
or limitation thereof is not permitted under the Delaware General Corporation
Law.
Our
by-laws provide for indemnification of our officers and directors to the fullest
extent permitted by applicable law. We also maintain directors’ and officers’
liability insurance policies.
Item
15. Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
On
November 17, 2004, we issued an aggregate of 100,000 shares of our Series B
preferred stock for $100 million in a private placement to Citigroup Global
Markets, Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness, Inc. and Lazard
Feres & Co., LLC (collectively, the “Initial Purchasers”), pursuant to a
Purchase Agreement dated November 11, 2004 between FuelCell and the Initial
Purchasers. The shares of our Series B preferred stock were issued to the
Initial Purchasers pursuant to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended. Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the Initial Purchasers were
granted an over-allotment option to purchase up to an additional 35,000 shares
of Series B preferred stock through January 25, 2005 and are entitled to
indemnification from us in certain circumstances. On January 14, 2005, we sold
an additional 5,875 shares of our Series B preferred stock to the Initial
Purchasers as part of the over-allotment option. Each of the shares of our
Series B preferred stock will be convertible at the holder’s option at any time
into 85.1064 shares of our common stock, subject to adjustment, which represents
an initial conversion price of $11.75 per share of our Series B preferred stock.
On and after November 29, 2004, if the closing price of our common stock exceeds
150 percent of the conversion price for 20 trading days during any consecutive
30 trading day period, we may, at our option, cause the shares of our Series B
preferred stock to be automatically converted into shares of our common stock at
the then prevailing conversion rate.
On
April 6, 2004, we issued warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of our common
stock to Marubeni Corporation. The warrant agreements call for the warrants to
be exercisable on a graduated scale based on order flow generated by Marubeni.
The full quantity of warrants will vest with order commitments for 45 megawatts
of DFC power plants. The exercise prices of the warrants range from $13.78 to
$18.73 per share and the warrants expire between April 2005 and April 2007. The
warrants were issued pursuant to the exemption provided by Section 4(2) of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended. All warrants issued to Marubeni prior to
April 6, 2004 were cancelled in conjunction with the April 6, 2004 warrant
agreements.
On
November 4, 2003, we signed a distribution agreement with Enbridge, Inc. to
distribute our products in Canada. As part of the agreement, Enbridge received
warrants to purchase 500,000 shares of our common stock. The agreement calls for
the warrants to be exercisable on a graduated scale based on order flow
generated by Enbridge. The full quantity of warrants will vest with order
commitments for 20 megawatts of DFC power plants. The exercise prices of the
warrants range from $14.65 to $19.04 per share and the warrants expire in
November 2006. The warrants were issued pursuant to the exemption provided by
Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933.
On
November 3, 2003, in connection with our acquisition of Global, we issued an
aggregate of approximately 8.2 million common shares and exchangeable shares to
the former shareholders of Global. The common and exchangeable shares were
issued pursuant to the exemption provided by Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended.
On
April 26, 2002, we signed an alliance agreement with Caterpillar, Inc. As part
of the agreement, Caterpillar received warrants to purchase 1,500,000 shares of
our common stock with exercise prices ranging from $17 to $23 per share. The
warrants vest on a graduated scale contingent upon the first 45 MW’s of order
commitments to purchase our products. The warrants were issued pursuant to the
exemption provided by Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.
Item
16. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a) EXHIBITS
The
following exhibits are included or incorporated herein by
reference:
Exhibit No. |
Description |
|
|
3.1
|
Certificate
of Incorporation of the Registrant, as amended, July 12, 1999
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the
Company's Form 8-K dated September 21, 1999)
|
3.1.1
|
Certificate
of Amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, dated
October 31, 2003 (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number
contained in the Company's Form 8-K dated November 4, 2003)
|
3.1.2
|
FuelCell
Energy, Inc. Certificate of Designation 135,000 Shares of 5% Series B
Cumulative Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's Form
8-K dated November 22, 2004)
|
3.1.3
|
Amended
Certificate of Designation 105,875 Shares of 5% Series B Cumulative
Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
exhibit of the same number contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Company's
registration statement on Form S-1 (Registration No. 333-122216) filed
with the SEC on March 14, 2005)
|
3.2
|
Restated
By-Laws of the Registrant, dated July 13,1999 (incorporated by reference
to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's Form 8-K dated
September 21, 1999)
|
4
|
Specimen
of Common Share Certificate (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the
same number contained in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10K/A for
fiscal year ended October 31, 1999)
|
5 |
Opinion
of Robinson & Cole LLP
|
10.1 |
Purchase
Agreement, dated November 11, 2004, among FuelCell Energy, Inc., Citigroup
Global Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams Harkness,
Inc., and Lazard Freres & Co., LLC. (incorporated by reference to
exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's Form 8-K dated
November 22, 2004)
|
10.2 |
Registration
Rights Agreement, dated November 17, 2004, among FuelCell Energy, Inc.,
Citigroup Global Markets Inc., RBC Capital Markets Corporation, Adams
Harkness, Inc., and Lazard Freres & Co., LLC. (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's Form
8-K dated November 22, 2004) |
10.3 |
Preferred
Stock Transfer Agency Agreement dated as of November 17, 2004 between the
Company and Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company (incorporated
by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in Amendment No. 1 to
the Company's registration statement on Form S-1 (Registration No.
333-122216) filed with the SEC on March 14, 2005)
|
10.4 |
Amendment
dated March 9, 2005 to Preferred Stock Transfer Agency Agreement
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in
Amendment No. 1 to the Company's registration statement on Form S-1
(Registration No. 333-122216) filed with the SEC on March 14,
2005) |
10.6
|
**License
Agreement, dated February 11, 1988, between EPRI and the Company
(confidential treatment requested) (incorporated by reference to exhibit
of the same number contained in the Company's Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 33-47233) dated April 14, 1992)
|
10.21
|
*FuelCell
Energy, Inc. 1988 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to exhibit
of the same number contained in the Company's Amendment No. 1 to its
Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 33-47233) dated June 1,
1992)
|
10.26
|
Addendum
to License Agreement, dated as of September 29, 1989, between
Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm and the Company (incorporated by reference to
exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's Amendment No. 3 to
its Registration Statement on Form S-1 (File No. 33-47233) dated June 24,
1992)
|
10.27
|
Cross-Licensing
and Cross-Selling Agreement, as amended December 15, 1999, between the
Company and MTU Motoren-Und Turbinen-Union Friedrichshafen GmbH (“MTU”)
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the
Company's 10-Q for the period ended January 31, 2000)
|
10.31
|
License
Agreement for The Santa Clara Demonstration Project between the Company
and the Participants in the Santa Clara Demonstration Project, dated
September 16, 1993 (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company's 10-KSB for fiscal year ended October 31,
1993, dated January 18, 1994)
|
10.32
|
Security
Agreement for the Santa Clara Demonstration Project, dated September 16,
1993 (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in
the Company's 10-KSB for fiscal year ended October 31, 1993, dated January
18, 1994)
|
10.33
|
Guaranty
By FuelCell Energy, Inc., dated September 16, 1993, for the Santa Clara
Demonstration Project (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company's 10-KSB for fiscal year ended October 31,
1993, dated January 18, 1994)
|
10.36
|
*The
FuelCell Energy, Inc. Section 423 Stock Purchase Plan (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's 10-KSB
for fiscal year ended October 31, 1994 dated January 18,
1995)
|
10.39
|
**Cooperative
Agreement, dated December 20, 1994, between the Company and the United
States Department of Energy, Cooperative Agreement #DE-FC21-95MC31184
(confidential treatment requested) (incorporated by reference to exhibit
of the same number contained in the Company's 10-KSB for fiscal year ended
October 31, 1994 dated January 18, 1995)
|
10.40
|
Loan
and Security Agreement between the Company and MetLife Capital Corporation
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the
Company's 10-KSB for fiscal year ended October 31, 1995 dated January 17,
1996)
|
10.41
|
*Amendment
No. 2 to the FuelCell Energy, Inc. Section 423 Stock Purchase Plan
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the
Company's 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 1996 dated June 13,
1996)
|
10.42
|
*Amendments
to the FuelCell Energy, Inc. 1988 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company's 10-Q
for the period ended April 30, 1996 dated June 13, 1996)
|
10.47
|
Amendment
of Cooperative Agreement dated September 5, 1996 between the Company and
the United States Department of Energy, Cooperative Agreement
#DE-FC21-95MC31184 (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company’s 10-K for the fiscal year ended October
31, 1998)
|
10.48
|
*Employment
Agreement between FuelCell Energy, Inc. and the Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Secretary, dated October 5, 1998 (incorporated by reference
to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company’s 10-K for the
fiscal year ended October 31, 1998)
|
10.49
|
*Employment
Agreement between FuelCell Energy, Inc. and the President and Chief
Executive Officer, dated August 1, 1997 (incorporated by reference to
exhibit of the same number contained in the Company’s 10-K for the fiscal
year ended October 31, 1997)
|
10.50
|
**Technology
Transfer and License Agreement between the Company and the Joint Venture
owned jointly by the Xiamen Daily-Used Chemicals Co., Ltd. of China and
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation of Taiwan, dated February 21, 1998
(incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the
Company’s 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 1998)
|
10.54
|
*The
FuelCell Energy, Inc. 1998 Equity Incentive Plan (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company’s 10-Q
for the period ended July 31, 1998)
|
10.55
|
Lease
agreement, dated March 8, 2000, between the Company and Technology Park
Associates, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company’s 10-Q for the period ended April 30,
2000)
|
10.56
|
Security
agreement, dated June 30, 2000, between the Company and the Connecticut
Development Authority (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company’s 10-Q for the period ended July 31,
2000)
|
10.57
|
Loan
agreement, dated June 30, 2000, between the Company and the Connecticut
Development Authority (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same
number contained in the Company’s 10-Q for the period ended July 31,
2000)
|
10.58
|
*Modification,
dated June 20, 2002, to the Employment Agreement between FuelCell Energy,
Inc. and the President and Chief Executive Officer (incorporated by
reference to exhibit of the same number contained in the Company’s 10-Q
for the period ended July 31, 2002)
|
10.59
|
Combination
Agreement, dated as of August 4, 2003, by and between by and between
FuelCell Energy, Inc., and Global Thermoelectric Inc. (incorporated by
reference to exhibit 2.1 contained in the Company's Form 8-K dated June
14, 2004)
|
10.60
|
Share
Purchase Agreement, dated as of April 19, 2004, by and between FuelCell
Energy, Inc., FCE Canada Inc., Global Thermoelectric Inc., GTI Acquisition
Inc. and Rockwood Equity Partners LLC (incorporated by reference to
exhibit 99.1 contained in the Company's Form 8-K dated August 4,
2003)
|
10.61
|
Asset
Purchase Agreement, dated October 19, 2004, by and among FuelCell Energy,
Inc., FuelCell Energy, Ltd., Versa Power Systems, Inc. and Versa Power
Systems, Ltd. (incorporated by reference to exhibit 99.1 contained in the
Company's Form 8-K dated October 25, 2004)
|
10.62
|
Share
Pledge Agreement, dated November 1, 2004, between FuelCell Energy, Inc.
and Enbridge, Inc. (incorporated by reference to exhibit 99.1 contained in
the Company's Form 8-K dated November 10, 2004)
|
10.63
|
Guaranty,
dated May 27, 2004 , between FuelCell Energy, Inc. and Enbridge, Inc.
(incorporated by reference to exhibit 99.2 contained in the Company's Form
8-K dated November 10, 2004)
|
10.64
|
Share
Structure Attached to and Forming Part of the Restated Articles of
FuelCell Energy, Inc. filed with the Alberta Registrar of Corporations On
May 27, 2004 (incorporated by reference to exhibit 99.3 contained in the
Company's Form 8-K dated November 10, 2004)
|
21
|
Subsidiaries
of the Registrant (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number
contained in the Company’s 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2004)
|
23.1 |
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
23.2 |
Consent
of Robinson & Cole LLP (included in Exhibit 5) |
|
|
24 |
Power
of attorney (incorporated by reference to exhibit of the same number
contained in the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, filed with
the SEC on January 21, 2005) |
* Management Contract or Compensatory Plan or Arrangement.
**Confidential
Treatment has been granted for portions of this document.
(B) FINANCIAL
STATEMENT SCHEDULES
Financial
statement schedules are not provided because of the absence of conditions under
which they are required or because the required information is given in the
consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
Item
17. Undertakings
The
undersigned Registrant hereby undertakes:
1. To
file, during any period in which offers or sales are being made, a
post-effective amendment to this Registration Statement:
(i) To
include any prospectus required by Section 10(a)(3) of the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended;
(ii) To
reflect in the prospectus any facts or events arising after the effective date
of the registration statement (or the most recent post-effective amendment
thereof) which, individually or in the aggregate, represent a fundamental change
in the information set forth in the registration statement. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, any increase or decrease in volume of securities offered (if the
total dollar value of securities offered would not exceed that which was
registered) and any deviation from the low or high and of the estimated maximum
offering range may be reflected in the form of prospectus filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b) if, in the
aggregate, the changes in volume and price represent no more than
20 percent change in the maximum aggregate offering price set forth in the
"Calculation of Registration Fee" table in the effective registration statement.
(iii) To
include any material information with respect to the plan of distribution not
previously disclosed in the registration statement or any material change to
such information in the registration statement.
2.
That,
for the purpose of determining any liability under the Securities Act of 1933,
as amended, each such post-effective amendment shall be deemed to be a new
registration statement relating to the securities offered therein, and the
offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona
fide offering thereof.
3.
To
remove from registration by means of a post-effective amendment any of the
securities being registered which remain unsold at the termination of the
offering.
4.
Insofar
as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, may be permitted to directors, officers and controlling persons of the
registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the registrant
has been advised that in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission
such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Act and is,
therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against
such liabilities (other than the payment by the registrant of expenses incurred
or paid by a director, officer or controlling person of the registrant in the
successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such
director, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being
registered, the registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter
has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate
jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public
policy as expressed in the Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of
such issue.
Signatures
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the registrant has duly
caused this Amendment No. 2 to this registration statement to be signed on its
behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Danbury,
State of Connecticut, on April 7, 2005.
|
|
|
|
FUELCELL ENERGY,
INC. |
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Jerry D. Leitman |
|
Jerry D. Leitman |
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer |
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this registration statement
has been signed by the following persons in the capacities and on the dates
indicated.
SIGNATURE |
TITLE |
DATE |
|
|
|
* |
Chairman
of the Board, President and |
April
7, 2005 |
Jerry
D. Leitman |
Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial |
April
7, 2005 |
Joseph
G. Mahler |
Officer,
Corporate Secretary and Treasurer |
|
|
(Principal
Accounting and Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
--------- |
Warren
D. Bagatelle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director |
April
7, 2005 |
Michael
Bode |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director
|
April
7, 2005 |
James
D. Gerson |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director
|
April
7, 2005 |
Thomas
L. Kempner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director |
--------- |
William
A. Lawson |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director
|
April
7, 2005 |
Charles
J. Murphy |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director |
April
7, 2005 |
John
A. Rolls |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Director
|
April
7, 2005 |
Thomas
R. Casten |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director |
--------- |
George
K. Petty |
|
|
*
By /s/ Jerry D. Leitman |
|
|
Jerry
D. Leitman
Attorney-in-Fact |
|
|
INDEX
OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Opinion
of Robinson & Cole LLP |
23.1 |
|
Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm |
23.2 |
|
Consent
of Robinson & Cole LLP (included in Exhibit
5) |